Journal of Management and Governance

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 305–332

The Corporate Governance Effects of Audit Committees

  • Stuart Turley
  • Mahbub Zaman
Article

Abstract

Arguments associated with the promotion of audit committees in many countries are premised on their potential for alleviating weaknesses in corporate governance. This paper provides a synthesis and evaluation of empirical research on the governance effects associated with audit committees. Given recent policy recommendations in several countries aimed at strengthening these committees, it is important to establish what research evidence demonstrates about their existing governance contribution.

A framework for analyzing the impact of audit committees is described, identifying potential perceived effects which may have led to their adoption and documented effects on aspects of the audit function, on financial reporting quality and on corporate performance. It is argued that there is only limited and mixed evidence of effects to support claims and perceptions about the value of audit committees for these elements of governance. It is also shown that most of the existing research has focused on factors associated with audit committee existence, characteristics and measures of activity and there is very little evidence on the processes associated with the operation of audit committees and the manner in which they influence organizational behaviour.

It is clear that there is no automatic relationship between the adoption of audit committee structures or characteristics and the achievement of particular governance effects, and caution may be needed over expectations that greater codification around factors such as audit committee members' independence and expertise as the means of “correcting” past weaknesses in the arrangements for audit committees. The most fundamental question concerning what difference audit committees make in practice continues to be an important area for research development. For future research we suggest (i) greater consideration of the organizational and institutional contexts in which audit committees operate; (ii) explicit theorization of the processes associated with audit committee operation; (iii) complementing extant research methods with field studies; and (iv) investigation of unintended (behavioural) as well as expected consequences of audit committees.

accountability audit committee effectiveness audit committee research corporate governance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AARF: 1997, Audit Committees: Best Practice Guide, Australia: Australian Accounting Research Foundation, Australian Institute of Company Directors and Institute of internal Auditors.Google Scholar
  2. Abbott, L.J. and S. Parker: 2000, “Auditor selection and audit committee characteristics”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19(2): 47–66.Google Scholar
  3. Abbott, L.J., S. Parker, and G. F. Peters: 2000, “The Effectiveness of Blue Ribbon Committee Recommendations in Mitigating Financial Misstatements: An Empirical Study, Working Paper (Draft 1.1 / November 2000), Santa Clara University.Google Scholar
  4. Abbott, L.J., Y. Park, and S. Parker: 2000“The effects of audit committee activity and independence on corporate fraud”, Managerial Finance 26(11): 55–67.Google Scholar
  5. Adams, M.: 1997, “Determinants of Audit Committee Formation in the Life Insurance Industry: New Zealand Evidence”, Journal of Business Research 38(2): 123–129.Google Scholar
  6. Allison, D.L.: 1994, “Internal Auditors and Audit Committees”, Internal Auditor, February, pp. 50–55. APB 1994 The Audit Agenda, London: Auditing Practices Board.Google Scholar
  7. Apostolou, B.: 1990, The role of Internal Auditor Communication with the Audit Committee”, Internal Auditing Fall 6(2): 35–42.Google Scholar
  8. Archambeault, D. and T. DeZoort: 2001, “Auditor Opinion Shopping and the Audit Committee: An Analysis of Suspicious Auditor Switches”, International Journal of Auditing 5: 33–52.Google Scholar
  9. Assiri, S.M. and M. Sherer: 2000, “Outsourcing the internal audit function: an empirical evaluation of benefits and pitfalls”, Paper presented at the Sixth Annual Midyear AAA Auditing Section Conference, California.Google Scholar
  10. Australian Treasury: 2002, Corporate Disclosure: Strengthening the Financial Reporting Framework. CLERP9, Department of Treasury, Commonwealth of Australia. http:// www.treasury.gov.au.Google Scholar
  11. Beasley, M.S.: 1996, “Board of Director Composition and Financial Statement Fraud”, Accounting Review 71(4): 443–465.Google Scholar
  12. Beasley, M.S., J.V., Carcello, D.R. Hermanson, and P.D. Lapides: 2000, “Fraudulent Financial Reporting: Consideration of Industry Traits and Corporate Governance Mechanisms”, Accounting Horizons 14(4): 441–454.Google Scholar
  13. Beattie, V., S. Fearnley, and R. Brandt: 2000, “Behind the Audit Report: A Descriptive Study of Discussions and Negotiations Between Auditors and Directors”, International Journal of Auditing 4: 177–202.Google Scholar
  14. Bell, T., F. Morris, I. Solomon, and H. Thomas: 1997, Auditing Organizations Through a Strategic-Systems Lens, Montvale, NJ: KPMG Peat Marwick LLP.Google Scholar
  15. Benston, G.J. and A.L. Hartgraves: 2002, “Enron: What Happened and What We can Learn from it”, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 21: 105–127.Google Scholar
  16. Blue Ribbon Committee: 1999, Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees (NY: NYSE and NASD).Google Scholar
  17. Bradbury, M.E.: 1990“The Incentives for Voluntary Audit Committee Formation”, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 9: 19–36.Google Scholar
  18. Brickley, J.A., J.L. Coles, and R.L. Terry: 1994, “Outside Directors and the Adoption of Poison Pills”, Journal of Financial Economics 35: 371–390.Google Scholar
  19. Cadbury Committee: 1992, Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance (London: Gee Publishing Ltd).Google Scholar
  20. Carcello, J.V. and T.L. Neal: 2000, “Audit Committee Composition and Auditor Reporting”, Accounting Review 75(4): 453–467.Google Scholar
  21. Carcello, J.V. and T.L. Neal: 2003, “Audit Committee Characteristics and Auditor Dismissals Following 'new' Going-concern Reports”, Accounting Review 78(1): 95–118.Google Scholar
  22. Cohen Commission: 1978, Report of the Commission on Auditors' Responsibilities, AICPA.Google Scholar
  23. Cohen, J. and D. Hanno: 2000, “Auditors Consideration of Corporate Governance and Management Philosophy in Preplanning and Planning Judgments”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19(2): 133–146.Google Scholar
  24. Cohen, J., G. Krishnamoorthy, and A.M. Wright: 2002, “Corporate Governance and the Audit Process”, Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(4): 573–94.Google Scholar
  25. Collier, P.: 1992, Audit Committees in Large UK Companies, (London: ICAEW Research Board).Google Scholar
  26. Collier, P.: 1993, “Factors affecting the formation of audit committees in major UK listed companies”, Accounting and Business Research 23(91A): 421–430.Google Scholar
  27. Collier, P.: 1996, “The Rise of the Audit Committee in UK Quoted Companies: A Curious Phenomenon?”, Accounting, Business and Financial History 6(2): 121–140.Google Scholar
  28. Collier, P. and A. Gregory: 1996, “Audit Committee Effectiveness and the Audit Fee”, European Accounting Review 5(2): 177–198.Google Scholar
  29. Collier, P. and A. Gregory: 1999, “Audit Committee Activity and Agency Costs”, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 18: 311–332.Google Scholar
  30. COSO: 1994, Internal Control – Integrated Framework. New York: Coopers and Lybrand / Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commissions.Google Scholar
  31. Cottell, P.G. and L.J. Rankin: 1988, Do Audit Committees Bias Auditor Selection?”, Akron Business and Economic Review, Winter 19(4): 87–103.Google Scholar
  32. Dalton, D.R., C.M. Daily, A.E. Ellstrand, and L.J. Johnson: 1998, “Meta-analytic Review of Board Composition, Leadership Structure and Financial Performance”, Strategic Management Journal 19: 269–290.Google Scholar
  33. Dechow, P. M., R.G. Sloan and A.P. Sweeney: 1996, Causes and Consequences of Earnings Manipulation: An Analysis of Firms Subject to Enforcement Action by the SEC”, Contemporary Accounting Research, Spring 13(1): 1–36.Google Scholar
  34. DeFond, M.L. and J. Jiambalvo: 1991, “Incidence and Circumstances of Accounting Errors”, Accounting Review, July 66(3): 643–655.Google Scholar
  35. DeZoort, F.T.: 1997, “An Investigation of Audit Committees' Oversight Responsibilities”, Abacus 33(2): 208–227.Google Scholar
  36. DeZoort, F.T.: 1998, “An Analysis of Experience Effects on Audit Committee Members' Oversight Judgments”, Accounting Organizations and Society 23(1): 1–21.Google Scholar
  37. DeZoort, F.T. and S. Salterio: 2000, “The Effects of Corporate Governance Experience and Financial Reporting and Audit Knowledge on Audit Committee Members' Judgments”, Working Paper, University of South Carolina.Google Scholar
  38. Eichenseher, J. W. and D. Shields: 1985, “Corporate Director Liability and Monitoring Preferences”, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 4: 13–31.Google Scholar
  39. Fama, E. and M. Jensen: 1983, “Separation of Ownership and Control”, Journal of Law and Economics 26: 301–325.Google Scholar
  40. Goodwin, J. and J.L. Seow: 2002, “The Influence of Corporate Governance Mechanisms on the Prevention and Detection of Control Weaknesses, Fraud and Error: The Perceptions of Auditors and Directors”, Accounting & Finance 42: 195–233.Google Scholar
  41. Guy, D. M. and S.A. Zeff: 2002, “Independence and Objectivity: Retired Partners on Audit Committee”, CPA Journal July: 31–34.Google Scholar
  42. Gwilliam, D. and M. Kilcommins: 1998, “The Impact of Audit Firm Size and Audit Committee on Perceptions of Auditor Independence and Financial Statement Reliability in Ireland”, Irish Accounting Review 5(1): 23–56.Google Scholar
  43. Haka, S. and P. Chalos: 1990, “Evidence of Agency Conflict Among Management, Auditors, and the Audit Committee Chair”, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 9: 271–292.Google Scholar
  44. Hatherly, D.: 1999, The Future of Auditing: The Debate in the UK”, European Accounting Review 8(11): 51–65.Google Scholar
  45. Hatherly, D., J. Innes and T. Brown: 1998, “Free-form Reporting and Perceptions of the Audit”, British Accounting Review 30(1): 23–38.Google Scholar
  46. Higgs: 2003, Review of the role and effectiveness of non-executive directors. London: Department of Trade and Industry.Google Scholar
  47. ICAEW: 1997, Audit Committees: A Framework for Assessment (London: ICAEW Audit Faculty).Google Scholar
  48. Jensen, M.C. and W.H. Meckling: 1976, “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure”, Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305–360.Google Scholar
  49. Jeppesen, K.K.: 1998, “Reinventing Auditing, Defining Consulting and Independence”, European Accounting Reviews 7(3): 517–541.Google Scholar
  50. Kalbers, L.P. and T.J. Fogarty: 1993, “Audit Committee Effectiveness: An Empirical Investigation of the Contribution of Power”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12(1): 24–49.Google Scholar
  51. Kalbers, L.P. and T.J. Fogarty: 1998, “Organizational and Economic Explanations of Audit Committee Oversight”, Journal of Managerial Issues 10(2): 129–151.Google Scholar
  52. Klein, A.: 1998a, “Economic Determinants of Audit Committee Composition and Activity”, Stern School of Business Working Paper, New York University.Google Scholar
  53. Klein, A.: 1998b, “Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure”, Journal of Law and Economics 41: 275–303.Google Scholar
  54. Klein, A.: 2002, “Audit Committee, Board of Directors Characteristics and Earnings Management”, Journal of Accounting and Economics 33: 375–401.Google Scholar
  55. Knapp, M.C.: 1987, “An Empirical Study of Audit Committee Support for Auditors Involved in Technical Disputes with Client Management”, Accounting Review 62(3): 578–588.Google Scholar
  56. Knapp, M.C.: 1991, “Factors that Audit Committee Members use as Surrogates for Audit Quality”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 10(1): 35–52.Google Scholar
  57. KPMG: 1999, The Financial Statement Audit: Why a New Age Requires an Evolving Methodology (Montvale, NJ: KPMG LLP).Google Scholar
  58. Kunitake, W.: 1981, “Do Audit Committees Favor the Large CPA Firms”, Journal of Accountancy August: 43–45.Google Scholar
  59. Kunitake, W.: 1983, “Auditor Changes by Audit Committees and Outside Directors”, Akron Business and Economic Review, Fall: 48–52.Google Scholar
  60. Lee, T.: 2001, “A Crisis of Confidence: US Auditing in the 21st Century”, International Journal of Auditing 5(1): 1–2.Google Scholar
  61. Lee, T. and M. Stone: 1997, “Economic Agency and Audit Committees: Responsibilities and Membership Composition”, International Journal of Auditing 1(2): 97–116.Google Scholar
  62. Lemon, W.M., K.M. Tatum and W.S. Turley: 2000, Developments in the Audit Methodologies of Large Accounting Firms. London: Auditing Practices Board.Google Scholar
  63. Lindsell, D.: 1992, “Blueprint for an Effective Audit Committee”, Accountancy, December, p. 104Google Scholar
  64. Manson, S. and M. Zaman: 2001, Auditor Communication in an Evolving Environment: Going Beyond SAS 600 Auditors' Reports on Financial Statements”, British Accounting Review 33: 113–136.Google Scholar
  65. Marsh, H.L. and T.E. Powell: 1989, “The Audit Committee Charter: Rx for Fraud Prevention”, Journal of Accountancy February: 5–57.Google Scholar
  66. Mautz, R.K. and F.L. Neumann: 1970, Corporate Audit Committees. Illinois: Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  67. McHugh, J. and K. Raghunandan: 1994, “Hiring and Firing the Chief Internal Auditor”, Internal Auditor August: 34–39.Google Scholar
  68. McMullen, D.A.: 1996, “Audit Committee Performance: An Investigation of the Consequences Associated with Audit Committees”, Auditing: Journal of Practice & Theory 15(1): 87–103.Google Scholar
  69. Menon, K. and J.D. Williams: 1994, “The Use of Audit Committees for Monitoring”, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 13: 121–139.Google Scholar
  70. Morse, A. and M. Keegan: 1999, Audit Committees: Good Practices for Meeting Market Expectations. London: PricewaterhouseCoopers.Google Scholar
  71. NCFFR: 1987, Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (Treadway Commission) (New York: AICPA).Google Scholar
  72. O'sullivan, N.: 1999, “Board Characteristics and Audit Pricing Post-Cadbury: A Research Note”, European Accounting Review 8(2): 253–263.Google Scholar
  73. O'sullivan, N.: 2000, “The Impact of Board Composition and Ownership on Audit Quality: Evidence From Large UK companies”, British Accounting Review 32(December), 397–414.Google Scholar
  74. Parker, S.: 2000, “The association between audit committee characteristics and the conservatism of financial reporting”, Paper presented at the American Accounting Association 2000 Annual Conference.Google Scholar
  75. Peasnell, K.V., P. Pope, and S. Young: 1999, “Characteristics of Firms Subject to Adverse Financial Reporting Review Panel Rulings”, Paper presented at the Financial Accounting and Auditing Research Conference, 12-13 July, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
  76. Peasnell, K.V., P. Pope, and S. Young: 2000, “Accrual Management to Meet Earnings Targets: UK Evidence Pre-and Post Cadbury”, British Accounting Review, 32(December), 415–445.Google Scholar
  77. Pincus, K., M. Rusbarsky, and J. Wong: 1989, “Voluntary Formation of Corporate Audit Committees Among NASDAQ firms”, Journal of Accounting And Public Policy 8: 239–65.Google Scholar
  78. Pong, C. and S. Turley: (1997) “Audit Firms and the Market”, In M. Sherer and S. Turley (eds.), Current Issues in Auditing, London: Paul Chapman.Google Scholar
  79. Powers Report (2002) Report of Investigation by the Special Investigative Committee of the Board of Directors of Enron Corp., February.Google Scholar
  80. Price Waterhouse (1997) Audit Committees – A Study in European Corporate Governance. London: Price Waterhouse.Google Scholar
  81. Rezaee, Z. and L.E. Farmer: 1994, “The Changing Role of the Audit Committee”, Internal Auditor Spring, 10–20.Google Scholar
  82. Rosentein, S. and J.G. Wyatt: 1990, “Outside Directors, Board Iindependence, and Shareholder Wealth”, Journal of Financial Economics 26: 175–191.Google Scholar
  83. Scarbrough, D.P., D.V. Rama and K. Raghunandan: 1998, “Audit Committee Composition and Interaction with Internal Auditing: Canadian Evidence”, Accounting Horizons 12(1):51–62.Google Scholar
  84. Schroeder, M.S., I. Solomon and D. Vickrey: 1986, “Audit Quality: The Perceptions of Audit Committee Chairpersons and Audit Partners”, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 5(2): 86–94.Google Scholar
  85. SEC: 2002, Disclosure Required by Section 404, 406 and 407 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Securities and Exchange Commission Release No. 33-8138. http://www.sec.gov/rules/ proposed/33-8138.htm.Google Scholar
  86. Sherer, M. and D. Kent: 1983, Auditing and Accountability. London: Pitman.Google Scholar
  87. Shivdasani, A.: 1993, “Board Composition, Ownership Structure, and Hostile Take-overs”, Journal of Accounting and Economics 16: 167–198.Google Scholar
  88. Smith Committee (2003) Audit Committees – Combined Code Guidance, Financial Reporting Council.Google Scholar
  89. Sommer, A.A.: 1991, “Auditing Audit Committees: An Educational Opportunity for Auditors”, Accounting Horizons 5(2): 91–93.Google Scholar
  90. Spira, L.: 1999, “Independence in Corporate Governance: The Audit Committee Role”, Business Ethics: A European Review 8(4): 262–273.Google Scholar
  91. Tricker, R.I.: 1978, The Independent Director: A study of the non-executive director and of the audit committee. Croydon: Tolley.Google Scholar
  92. Tsui, J., Subramaniam, N. and J.S. Hoy: 1994, “The Effects of Audit Committees on Bankers' Perceptions of Auditor Independence”, Corporate Governance: An International Review, April, 2(2): 101–107.Google Scholar
  93. Turley, S. and M. Zaman: 2003, Public Policy on Corporate Audit Committees: Case Study Evidence of Current Practice. Occasional Research Paper No. 35, Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, London.Google Scholar
  94. Turnbull: 1999, Internal Control: Guidance for directors of listed companies incorporated in the UK, London: ICAEW.Google Scholar
  95. Turner, L.E.: 2001, “Audit Committees: A Call for Action. Speech delivered at the Conference on Accounting Irregularities II: What's an Audit Committee To Do?”, 21 February 2001, Atlanta, Georgia.Google Scholar
  96. Turpin, R.A. and F.T. DeZoort: 1998, “Characteristics of Firms that Include an Audit Committee Report in their Annual Report”, International Journal of Auditing 2: 35–48.Google Scholar
  97. Vicknair, D., K. Hickman and K.C. Carnes: 1993, “A Note on Audit Committee Independence: Evidence from the NYSE on “grey” Area Directors”, Accounting Horizons, Mar, 7(1): 53–7.Google Scholar
  98. Weisbach, M.S. and B.J. Hermalin: 2000, “Board of Directors as an Endogenously Determined Institution: A Survey of the Economic Literature”, Working Paper, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  99. Wild, J.: 1994, “Managerial Accountability to Shareholders: Audit Committees and the Explanatory Power of Earnings for Returns”, British Accounting Review 26: 353–374.Google Scholar
  100. Wild, J.: 1996, “The Audit Committee and Earnings Quality”, Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 11(2): 247–276.Google Scholar
  101. Windram, B. and J. Song: 2000, “The Effectiveness of Audit Committees: Evidence from UK Companies in the Post-Cadbury Period”, Paper presented at the British Accounting Association Annual Conference, University of Exeter.Google Scholar
  102. Wolnizer, P.W.: 1995, Are Audit Committees Red Herrings?”, Abacus 31(1): 45–66.Google Scholar
  103. Wright, D.W.: 1996, “Evidence on the Relation between Corporate Governance Characteristics and the Quality of Financial Reporting”, Working Paper, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  104. Zaman, M.: 2001, “Turnbull – Generating Undue Expectations of the Corporate Governance Role of Audit Committees”, Managerial Auditing Journal 16(1): 5–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stuart Turley
    • 1
  • Mahbub Zaman
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Accounting and FinanceUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUKM13 9PL

Personalised recommendations