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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Chaney, P.K. and Philipich, K.L., 2002. Shredded Reputation: The Cost of Audit Failure. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(4), S. 1221–1245
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
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
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
Cushing, B.E. and Loebbecke, J.K. eds., 1986. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association
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
K Europäische Kommission, 2010. GRÜNBUCH – Weiteres Vorgehen im Bereich der Abschlussprüfung: Lehren aus der Krise. Brussels 2010
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
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
Gietzmann, M. and Quick, R., 1998. Capping Auditor Liability: The German Experience. Accounting, Organizations and Society 23 (1), S. 81–103
Gärtner, M., 1994. Analytische Prüfungshandlungen im Rahmen der Jahresabschlussprüfung: Ein Grandsatz ordnungsmäßiger Abschlussprüfung. Marburg: Hitzeroth
Gigerenzer, G. and Selten, R., 2002. Bounded Rationality. Cambridge: MIT Press
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
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
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
Heiman, V.B., 1990. Auditors' assessments of the likelihood of error explanations in analytical review. The AccountingReview, 65(October), S. 875–890
Hirst, D.E. and Koonce, L., 1996. Audit analytical procedures: a field investigation. ContemporaryAccounting Research, 13(2), S. 457–486.
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
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
Hylas, R.E. and Ashton, R.H., 1982. Audit detection of financial statement errors. The Accounting Review, 57(4), S. 751–765
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
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
Kayadelen, E., 2008. Zur Durchführung von analytischen Prüfungshandlungen: Eine theoretische und empirische Analyse aus einer verhaltenswissenschaftlichen Perspektive, Saarbrücken: VDM
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
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
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
Koonce, L., 1992. Explanation and counterexplanation during audit analytical review. The Accounting Review, 67(1), S. 59–76
Koonce, L., 1993. A cognitive characterization of audit analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 12(Spring), S. 57–108
Mahathevan, P., 1997. Auditors' use and perception of analytical procedures: evidence from Singapore. International Journal of Auditing, 1(3), S. 225–239
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
Major, B., 1980. Information acquisition and attribution processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), S. 1010–1023
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
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.
Meyer, D.E. and Schvaneveldt, R.W., 1976. Meaning, memory structures and mental processes, Science, 192(4232), S. 27–33
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
Newell, A. and Simon, H.A. eds. 1972. Human Problem Solving. Englewoods Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall
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
Nickerson, R.S., 1984. Retrieval Inhibition from Part-set Cueing: A Persisting Enigma in Memory Research. Memory and Cognition, S. 531–552
Public Oversight Board (POB), 2000. The Panel on Audit Effectiveness: Report and Recommendations. Stamford: CT
Quick, R./Kayadelen, E., 2011. Zum Einfluss von Mandantenerklärungen auf den Urteilsbildungsprozess bei analytischen Prüfungshandlungen, Die Betriebswirtschaft, 71(1), S. 11–39.
Stock, J.H. and Watson, M.W., 2007. Introduction toEconometrics. 2nd edition, Boston et al.: Pearson
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
Taplin, J.R., 1975. Evaluation of hypotheses in concept identification. Memory and Cognition, 3(1), S. 85–96
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1973a. Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), S. 207–232
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1973b. On the Psychology of Prediction. Psychological Review,80(4), S. 237–251
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1974. Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science,185(4157), S. 1124–1131
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), S. 263–292
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
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights 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)