There would be demand for independent assessment of products made by humanity as long as human beings are not perfect. The Audit Society is a term used by Michael Power to name his book about role of audit in our life. So the major question I would address these days is as follows:
«Can audit of financial statements accomplish its objectives
effectively and efficiently and still be profitable business with
active competitive market?»
For productive discussion it would be useful to remind some elements of agency theory in illustration below:
As recognized in previous post auditors were given specific ‘societal mandate’, but stakeholders (principals) of auditors' (agents) activity are not satisfied with the work done.
I have some ideas, which I would like to share.
Addressing Independence
Audit business is not only attesting business in the world. There are lots of firms around evaluate, assess and make opinions. Examples? Here are they:
· Knowledge tests for students: GRE, GMAT, EITLS, Toefl;
· Exams for professionals: US CPA exams; ACCA exams;
· University system assessment of knowledge;
· Peer reviewed journals: review of scientific articles
· And so on, there are lots of them!
All of these businesses do similar thing – express opinion about quality/level of something. The key thing in independence here that markers (evaluators) do not know their concrete client (personalities) and clients do not know concrete people who check their workings. In audit of financial statements it is not an easy to do thing.
However, we can eliminate influence of board of directors decision to switch an auditor on independence of audit firm. How?! I would propose following model. For example, we are going to pay special attention on audit of global multinational companies (MNC) by audit firms. Given that assets and performance of MNCs are spread across the world it is difficult enough to observe independence of audit firms on local level.
Global (National) Audit Fund (GAF)
GAF could be established by G20/G40 countries to tackle the problem. The function of GAF would be to appoint external auditors for MNCs and pay remuneration to auditors. There would be list of MNCs which activity has national and global impact (addressing partly “too big to fail” issue). Criteria to include MNC in list are not a problem and could be easily established. GAF would be funded through following sources:
· investor/shareholder tax, which could be withdrawn at the moment of purchase shares or could be part of dividend tax;
· government budgets (with inevitable increase of MNC and/or individual taxes).
Thus, in our model we would align practice with theory: principals pay agents to act for their benefit. Agents care about their business and prosperity and would do anything to satisfy their customers-principals. MNCs’ financial statements (FS), which audit firm would have to audit under the contract are only subject of an agreement – more precisely it is kind of product produced by other agents (management of company) of principals. To say more allegorical FS are just peace of paper with student’s workings which are needed to be assessed.
Issues to concern about
I would suggest following problems of model:
· process of external auditor appointment: inevitable ‘red tape’, threat of corruption;
· competition on audit market;
· quality and nature of service rendered by audit firm.
I would be glad and grateful if guys reading my blog would provide their suggestions in comments and participate in discussion.
In the next post I am keen to address the expectation gap issue and nature of services provided by auditor. I suppose it might be partial solution to the problems of model identified above.
References:
Power, M. (1997). The Audit society: rituals of verification. Oxford : Oxford University
