Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Managementerklärungen und die Qualität analytischer Prüfungshandlungen

The Effect of Management Explanations on Auditor Decision Processes in Analytical Procedures

  • Chapter
Book cover Corporate Governance in mittelständischen Unternehmen

Part of the book series: ZfB Special Issue ((ZFB,volume 2/2013))

  • 5582 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Im Rahmen analytischer Prüfungshandlungen bilden Abschlussprüfer erwartete (= Soll-) Werte, die sie mit den Angaben im zu überprüfenden Jahresabschluss (= Istwerte) vergleichen. Im Falle unerwarteter Soll-/Ist-Abweichungen ist eine Stellungnahme des Managements einzuholen, wobei bisherige Forschungsergebnisse zeigen, dass diese Stellungnahme den Urteilsbildungsprozess des Prüfers negativ beeinflusst. Diese Studie betrachtet erstmals den Zeitraum nach den großen Bilanzskandalen und stellt die erste deutsche Studie dar, die die Auswirkungen einer Managementerklärung auf die einzelnen Teilschritte im Rahmen analytischer Prüfungshandlungen multivariat analysiert. Dabei kann kein genereller negativer Einfluss festgestellt werden. Vielmehr finden sich Hinweise, dass Abschlussprüfer bei als riskant wahrgenommenen Mandanten signifikant häufiger einen Fehler im Rechnungswesen vermuten, wenn eine Mandantenerklärung vorliegt. Aufgrund von Budget- und/oder Zeitrestriktionen sind die Probanden jedoch nicht in der Lage, ihren Verdacht vollständig aufzuklären, so dass letztendlich ein tatsächlich vorliegender Fehler nicht moniert wird.

Abstract

By the use of analytical procedures auditors generate predicted amounts, and compare these with the recorded values found in financial statements. When discrepancies occur, auditors have to consult managers for explanations of any unexpected fluctuations. Previous empirical research has reported that the explanations made by managers influence the generation of hypotheses and can lead to a biased analytical procedures process. The experimental study presented herein is the first post-Enron study to investigate the ways in which the explanations of managers affect the different stages of the analytical procedures process. We do not find evidence for a negative effect of explanations by managers on the efficiency and effectiveness of analytical procedures. However, the effect of ‘hypotheses overload’ was revealed for situations of increased likelihood of misstatement. In such a situation, auditors generated a greater number of error hypotheses. Because this did not result in an intensified search for information, it was even shown to reduce the abilities of auditors to identify the actual cause of a discrepancy in the error version of the case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Ameen, E.C. and Strawser, J.R., 1994. Investigating the use of analytical procedures: an update and extension. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 13(Fall), S. 69–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J.C., Kaplan, S.E. and Reckers, P.M.J., 1992. The effects of output interference on analytical procedures judgements. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 11(Fall), S. 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, U. and Koonce, L., 1995. Explanation as a method for evaluating client-suggested causes in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 14(Fall), S. 124–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, U. and Koonce, L., 1998. Evaluating the sufficiency of causes in auditing analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 17(Spring), S. 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Asare, S.K. and Wright, A.M., 2003. A note on the interdependence between hypothesis generation and information search in conducting analytical procedures. Contemporary Accounting Research, 20(2), S. 235–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asare, S.K., Wright, A. and Wright, S., 1998. Utilizing analytical procedures as substantive evidence: the impact of a client explanation on hypothesis testing. Advances in Accounting BehavioralResearch, Volume 1, S. 13–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedard, J.C. and Biggs, S.F., 1991. The effect of domain-specific experience on evaluation of management representations in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 10(Suppl.), S. 78–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedard, J.C. and Graham, L.E., 2002. The Effects of Decision Aid Orientation on Risk Factor Identification and Audit Test Planning. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 21(2), S. 39–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benston, G.J. and Hartgraves, A.L., 2002. Enron: What happened and what we can learn from it. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 21(2), S. 105–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierstaker, J.L., Bedard, J.C. and Biggs, S.F., 1999. The role of problem representation shifts in auditor decision processes in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Theory & Practice,18(Spring), S. 18–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, S.F. and Wild, J.J., 1984. A note on the practice of analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 3(Spring), S. 68–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaney, P.K. and Philipich, K.L., 2002. Shredded Reputation: The Cost of Audit Failure. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(4), S. 1221–1245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, J.-H., Kim, C., Kim, J.-B. and Zang, Y., 2010. Audit Office Size, Audit Quality, and Audit Pricing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 29 (1), S. 73–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Church, B.K. and Schneider, A., 1993. Auditor's generation of diagnostic hypotheses in response to a superior's suggestion: interference effects. Contemporary Accounting Research, 10(1), S. 333–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coackley, J.R. and Loebbecke, J.K., 1985. The expectation of accounting errors in medium-sized manufacturing firms. Advances in Accounting, Volume 2, Oxford: Elsevier, S. 199–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Cushing, B.E. and Loebbecke, J.K. eds., 1986. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association

    Google Scholar 

  • Daroca, F.P. and Holder, W.W., 1985. The use of analytical procedures in review and audit engagement. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 4(Spring), S. 81–92

    Google Scholar 

  • K Europäische Kommission, 2010. GRÜNBUCH – Weiteres Vorgehen im Bereich der Abschlussprüfung: Lehren aus der Krise. Brussels 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, J.R. and D. Wang, 2008. The Joint Effect of Investor Protection and Big 4 Audits on Earnings Quality aroand the World litigation. Contemporary Accounting Research 25 (1), S. 157–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, I.A.M., Hatherly, D.J. and Lin, K.Z., 1997. An empirical investigation of the use of analytical review by external auditors. The British Accounting Review, 29(1), S. 35–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gietzmann, M. and Quick, R., 1998. Capping Auditor Liability: The German Experience. Accounting, Organizations and Society 23 (1), S. 81–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gärtner, M., 1994. Analytische Prüfungshandlungen im Rahmen der Jahresabschlussprüfung: Ein Grandsatz ordnungsmäßiger Abschlussprüfung. Marburg: Hitzeroth

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. and Selten, R., 2002. Bounded Rationality. Cambridge: MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, W. J., 2004. Impact of the timing of receipt of an inherited explanation on auditors' analytical procedures judgements. Accounting and Finance, 44(3), S. 369–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, W.J., 2008. Are industry specialists more efficient and effective in performing analytical procedures? A multistage analysis. International Journal of Auditing, 12(3), S. 243–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, W.J. and Trotmann, K.T., 2003. An examination of different performance outcomes in an analytical procedures task. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 22(Fall), S. 219–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiman, V.B., 1990. Auditors' assessments of the likelihood of error explanations in analytical review. The AccountingReview, 65(October), S. 875–890

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, D.E. and Koonce, L., 1996. Audit analytical procedures: a field investigation. ContemporaryAccounting Research, 13(2), S. 457–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. and Minkov, M., 2010. Cultures and Organizations – Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival. 3rd edition. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Holder, W.W., 1983. Analytical review procedures in planning the audit: an application study. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 2(Spring), S. 100–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Hylas, R.E. and Ashton, R.H., 1982. Audit detection of financial statement errors. The Accounting Review, 57(4), S. 751–765

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L.E. and Johnson, E.N., 1997. Differences in planning-phase analytical procedures between municipal and commercial clients: initial evidence. Journal of Applied Business Research, 13(2), S. 37–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S.E. and Reckers, P.M., 1989. An examination of information search during initial audit planning. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 14(5–6), S. 539–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kayadelen, E., 2008. Zur Durchführung von analytischen Prüfungshandlungen: Eine theoretische und empirische Analyse aus einer verhaltenswissenschaftlichen Perspektive, Saarbrücken: VDM

    Google Scholar 

  • Khurana, I.K. and Raman, K.K., 2004. Litigation Risk and the Financial Reporting Credibility of Big 4 versus Non-Big 4 Audits: Evidence from Anglo-American Countries. The Accounting Review 79(2), S. 473–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinney, W.R. and Haynes, C.M., 1990. Analytical procedure results as substantive evidence. In: Srivastava, R. ed 1990. Auditing Symposium X, Proceedings of the 1990 Deloitte and Touche/ University of Kansas symposium on auditingproblems. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas, S. 83-103

    Google Scholar 

  • Köhler, A.G. and Marten, K.-U., 2002. Durchführung externer Qualitätskontrollen in der Wirtschaftsprüferpraxis – Vergleich deutscher und US-amerikanischer Normen. Die Wirtschaftsprüfung, 55(5), S. 241–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Koonce, L., 1992. Explanation and counterexplanation during audit analytical review. The Accounting Review, 67(1), S. 59–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Koonce, L., 1993. A cognitive characterization of audit analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 12(Spring), S. 57–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahathevan, P., 1997. Auditors' use and perception of analytical procedures: evidence from Singapore. International Journal of Auditing, 1(3), S. 225–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Maijoor, S.J. and Vanstaelen, A., 2006. Earnings Management within Europe: The Effects of Member State Audit Environment, Audit Firm Quality and International Capital Markets. Accounting and Business Research 36(1), S. 33–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major, B., 1980. Information acquisition and attribution processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), S. 1010–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeithen, K.B., Reitman, J.S., Rueter, H.H. and Hirtle, S.C., 1981. Knowledge organization and skill differences in computer programmers. Cognitive Psychology, 13(3), S. 307–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messier, W.F., 1995. Research in and development of audit-decision aids. In: Ashton, R.H. and Ashton, A.H. eds. 1995. Judgement and Decision-Making Research in Accounting and Auditing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D.E. and Schvaneveldt, R.W., 1976. Meaning, memory structures and mental processes, Science, 192(4232), S. 27–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, M.W., 2009. A Model and Literature Review of Professional Skepticism in Auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 28(2), S. 1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A. and Simon, H.A. eds. 1972. Human Problem Solving. Englewoods Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, T., Green, W. and Simnett, R., 2001. The effects of fraud risk and management representation on auditors' hypothesis generation. ABACUS, 37(3), S. 352–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson, R.S., 1984. Retrieval Inhibition from Part-set Cueing: A Persisting Enigma in Memory Research. Memory and Cognition, S. 531–552

    Google Scholar 

  • Public Oversight Board (POB), 2000. The Panel on Audit Effectiveness: Report and Recommendations. Stamford: CT

    Google Scholar 

  • Quick, R./Kayadelen, E., 2011. Zum Einfluss von Mandantenerklärungen auf den Urteilsbildungsprozess bei analytischen Prüfungshandlungen, Die Betriebswirtschaft, 71(1), S. 11–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stock, J.H. and Watson, M.W., 2007. Introduction toEconometrics. 2nd edition, Boston et al.: Pearson

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabor, R.H. and Willis, J.T., 1985. Empirical evidence on the changing role of analytical review procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 4(Spring), S. 93–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Taplin, J.R., 1975. Evaluation of hypotheses in concept identification. Memory and Cognition, 3(1), S. 85–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1973a. Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), S. 207–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1973b. On the Psychology of Prediction. Psychological Review,80(4), S. 237–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1974. Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science,185(4157), S. 1124–1131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), S. 263–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1982. Judgements of and by Representativeness. In: Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. eds. 1982. Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, S. 84–98

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. HSBC Trinkaus & Burkhardt AG, Königsallee 21/23, 40212, Düsseldorf

    Dr. Engin Kayadelen (Prokurist und Senior Manager Konzernbilanz)

  2. Fachgebiet Rechnungswesen Controlling & Wirtschaftsprüfung, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Hochschulstraße 1, 64289, Darmstadt

    Prof. Dr. Reiner Quick

  3. Fachbereich IV – Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Universität Trier, Universitätsring 15, 54296, Trier

    Prof. Dr. Matthias Wolz (Lehrstuhl für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, insbesondere Wirtschaftsprüfung & Controlling)

Authors
  1. Dr. Engin Kayadelen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. Dr. Reiner Quick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Prof. Dr. Matthias Wolz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Martin Welge Peter Witt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kayadelen, E., Quick, R., Wolz, M. (2013). Managementerklärungen und die Qualität analytischer Prüfungshandlungen. In: Welge, M., Witt, P. (eds) Corporate Governance in mittelständischen Unternehmen. ZfB Special Issue, vol 2/2013. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02429-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02429-1_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-02428-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-02429-1

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation