- 上一篇：代理问题和企业理论英文文献和翻译
- 下一篇：公司治理与企业舞弊英文文献和翻译
5.3 External Auditors
For EA only three out of the ten aspects asked of the respondents gained an average score higher than three and are therefore considered “relevant enough” by the consulted auditors. It was the same for SA.
The most important issues related to auditing activity may come from the indifference of management bodies towards the activity performed by the auditors (7), as well as from insufficient internal support of the activities focused on drafting the audit or certification report (5).
The inappropriate interest connections or the excessive“business” orientation of auditing firms are not perceived as possible issues.
The most relevant aspects identified by external auditors with reference to improvement actions are: strengthening penalties (12), streamlining bureaucratic duties (17), increasing public supervision authority powers (20) and reinforcing auditors’education (14).
The penalty theme is evidently judged of primary importance, also taking into consideration the scandals that have involved some auditing firms over the last few years; penalty can therefore be seen as a deterrent that gives some kind of further “assurance” to the auditors’actions.
The “new” ERM (Enterprise Risk Management) model, as an evolution of the former CoSO (Committee of Sponsoring Organisation of the Treadway Commission Report) model, could therefore contribute to reducing most of the limits and problems related to the execution of control activities (Table 1), by affecting the improvement components (Table 2).
About 19 questions out of the 20 questions mentioned in Tables 1 and 2 (Sect. 5.1) described a sense of urgency for the IA that is not relevant for the SA and EA (as a matter of fact, except for question n. 15, with reference to the remaining questions IA constantly indicated a higher relevance for each factor, if compared to the importance given by the other control bodies). This could be translated into a pessimistic approach within the IAs or into excessive optimism within the EA or SA.
Even if the authors can not answer this latter doubt, the remaining factor is totally different company processes between IA and the other roles in charge of auditing responsibility.
The following assumptions could explain this difference: IA are in closer contact with company processes and especially auditing processes (that is why they are more conscious of possible risks); IA’s role is relatively new in Italy; this generates greater risks but also greater improvement opportunities; SA and EA are much more influenced by recent financial scandals. Their answers seem to be produced by a slightly defensive approach.
All the auditing roles stressed the lack of visibility of the BoD (issue no. 7, Table 1). IA and EA also mention the obstacles put in place by the management to limit the information flow within the company (issue no. 8, Table 1).
The same issue is considered slightly less relevant by the SA.
These issues are a clear sign of a lack of auditing culture. The managers being checked are totally unaware of the importance of auditing processes in a company organisation and they would clearly prefer not to be audited.
Auditing, however, should be an important opportunity for comparison for the auditor and the audited.
The perception of auditing as a useful tool to improve the quality of organisational structures and processes does not exist. It is perceived as an opportunity to find possible errors and to sanction unprofessional managers.
The assumptions described in Sect. 4.2 are mentioned in this last section in order to clarify when they were positively or negatively tested.
H1 has been positively verified. IA, EA and SA answered promptly: the governance is a critical factor and everything that is directly linked to that.
H2 has been positively verified. As mentioned above, the answers provided by the IA are better on average when compared with those provided by the remaining two roles. The reasons could be found in better knowledge of company dynamics and in less legacy of their role (relatively new within a company structure) compared with SA and EA. The influence of recent financial scandals on their role should not be forgotten: the scandals resulted in sudden improvements in tasks and responsibilities of their role.