- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
This synthesis covers academic research on the use of valuation, tax, information technology (IT), and forensic specialists on audit engagements. The importance and role of specialists on audit engagements have recently increased, and specialist use has garnered significant attention from regulators and academics. Given the PCAOB’s (2017b) recent proposal to revise auditing standards regarding specialists’ involvement, it is important to review the specialist literature as a whole. By integrating research across these four domains, I identify commonalities and differences related to: (1) factors associated with the use of specialists on audit engagements (including the nature, timing, and extent of use); (2) factors impacting auditors’ interactions with specialists (including specialists contracted by the auditor or management); and (3) outcomes associated with the use of specialists. This integrated analysis of the specialist literatures shows variation in the use of specialists, and various factors affecting both if and how they are involved and whether auditors use specialists internal or external to the audit firm. Additionally, research has sometimes (but not always) linked specialist involvement to higher audit quality. The commonalities and areas of variation identified are informative to audit research and practice, particularly as regulators and audit firms look to improve the quality of audits using specialists. Throughout the synthesis, I also provide a number of directions for future research.
In conclusion, changes in the financial reporting environment, such as increasingly complex estimates, the nature of clients’ operations, and greater technology use, are prompting auditors’ use of specialists on audit engagements. These specialists are highly-skilled experts in their domain, who help auditors assess risk and/or perform procedures to support the audit opinion. Currently, the lines of research on valuation, tax, IT audit, and forensic specialists are growing independently of each other, so it is important to review these literatures collectively, particularly given the PCAOB’s (2017b) amendments to auditing standards on specialist use and that there are common issues across these literatures. This synthesis consolidates the extant research regarding auditors’ use of these four types of specialists to show: (1) specific factors and dimensions of those factors that influence the nature, timing and extent of specialists’ involvement (e.g., risks and complexities); (2) factors that impact the effectiveness of auditorspecialist interactions, both when working with auditors’ specialists and management’s specialists; and (3) how these factors affect audit outcomes and audit quality. Throughout this synthesis, I also suggest numerous opportunities for future research on these topics and note where individual specialist research streams investigate certain matters that other literatures could build upon.