- Log In/Sign Up
- E-ISSN2233-5382
- KCI
E-ISSN : 2233-5382
The Limitations of Risk-based Auditing using Fuzzy Methods
Abstract
Purpose - Investors, creditors, governments, and others make decisions using reasonable information provided by others. In many cases, the users of this information have goals and objectives conflicting with those of the information's producers, indicating the need for external auditors. Research design, data, and methodology - Competition in auditing has noticeably intensified globally, especially in developed countries. This means that auditors are striving to increase the efficiency of their methods. In recent years, risk-based auditing has become prominent among these efforts. In risk-assessment auditing, the auditor may directly affect the effectiveness and efficiency of the audit. Results - As a central framework, the risk assessment process improves audit quality and effectiveness such that the audit will lead to necessary changes. Previous studies have shown that risk assessment affects the nature, timing, and content of audit procedures. Conclusions - In the planning stage of an audit, audit risk assessment may identify any inappropriate or inefficient distribution of resources or determine whether the results of an audit will be ineffective or incorrect. Thus, assessing audit risk is a critical task.
- keywords
- Risk-based Auditing, Fuzzy Methods, Limitations, Audit Risk
Reference
Carcello, J., and Terry, N. (2006). Audit Committee Composition and Auditor Reporting. The Accounting Review, 75 (4), 136-197.
Jagan, K., and Jayanthi, K. (1997). Litigation Risk and Auditor Resignations. The Accounting Review, 52(4), 539-560.
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, 59(2), 453-495.
King,S. F., & Burgess, T. F. (2005). Understanding Success and Failure in Customer Relationship Management. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4), 421-431.
Paterson, E., Newman, D. P., and Smith, R. (2001). The Influence of Potentially Fraudulent Reports on Audit Risk Assessment and Planning. The Accounting Review, 56(1), 59-80.
Sandra, C. (2005). Corporate Governance Reforms: Redefined Expectations of Audit Committee Responsibilities and Effectiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(2), 1-25.
Sidani, M. Y. (2005). The Audit Expectation Gap: Evidence from Lebanon. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(3), 288-302.
Tueysuz, C. Kahraman (2006). Project Risk Evaluation Using a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Application to Information Technology Projects. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 21, 559-584.
Waller W. S. (1993). Auditors’ Assessments of Inherent Risk and Control Risk in Field Settings. The Accounting Review, 68(4), 583-803.
Zulkarnain, M. S., Shamsher, M., and Mohamad Ali, A. H. (2001). Compliance of Audit Committee: A Brief Review of the Practice. Journal of Malaysian Institute of Accountants, 14(5), 4-5.
Nolan, P. (1995). Ohina's R~se Russia's Fall. London, UK:Macmillan.
Pyatt, G. (1977). Roe, A. Social Accounting for Development Planning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Pyatt, G., and Round, J. I. (1997). Social Accountin 9 Matrices, Symposium Series. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Pyatt, G. (1991). Fundamentals of Social Accounting. Economic System Research, 3, 315-341.
Silverman, B., and Yanowitch, M. (1997). Winners and Losers on the Russian Road to Capitalism. Armonk, N.Y: M. E. Sharpe
Walder, A. G. (1996). China's Transitional Economy. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
- Downloaded
- Viewed
- 0KCI Citations
- 0WOS Citations