Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Accounting, Faculty Of Management & Accounting, Islamic Azad University Qazvin Branch, Qazvin, Iran.

2 Associate Professor of Accounting, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor of Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin Branch, Qazvin, Iran.

Abstract

The implementation of the engagement quality control review (EQCR) by the engagement quality control reviewer has been considered as one of the key elements of quality control in the auditing standards and its implementation is required in the audit of companies listed on the stock exchange. In this research, the data were collected through (1) conducting interviews with 25 partners of Iranian auditing firms in the spring and summer of 2023 and (2) the opinions of 12 certified accountants that were published in a newspaper or professional journals in the form of a conversation, round table, notes or articles. Then, by applying the grounded theory, the components that are the obstacles to the effective application of EQCR are identified and presented in the form of a conceptual system model. The validity of the research model was confirmed by 7 audit partners. The findings from the analysis of research data show that there are various obstacles in its different dimensions, the most important of which are: the structure and organization of some audit firm, the small size of many audit firms, economic considerations, low fees of Iranian audit firms, lack of qualified auditors, moral issues in the society, the society's specific problems, governing laws and regulations, weaknesses in quality grading of audit firms, inadequate communication with international professional communities, low awareness of auditing and lack of development, and low application of technology in Iranian audit firms. Considering that the international auditing standard 220 has been updated and includes more requirements for the EQCR, along with the findings of this research showing that the quality control standard is not effectively implemented by Iranian audit firms, some suggestions are given to fill these gaps.

Introduction

The objective of a firm is to design, implement, and operate a system of quality control for audit, review of financial statements, or other assurance or related services engagements performed by a firm, that provides the firm with reasonable assurance that: (a) The firm and its personnel fulfill their responsibilities in accordance with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and conduct engagements in accordance with such standards and requirements; and (b) Engagement reports issued by the firm or engagement partners are appropriate in the circumstances. According to the auditing standards, engagement quality review is an objective evaluation of the significant judgments made by the engagement team and the conclusions reached thereon, performed by the engagement quality reviewer and completed on or before the date of the engagement report. Engagement quality reviewer is a partner, other individual in the firm, or an external individual, appointed by the firm to perform the engagement quality review (IAASB, 2020). Surveys show that engagement quality control review, as one of the key elements of quality control, has not been established in Iranian audit firms. Its causes have not been clarified in previous research. Therefore, in this research, we seek to clarify its causes and obstacles.
Research Question(s)
What are the obstacles of applying engagement quality control review in Iranian audit firms?

Literature Review

Engagement quality control review is one of the key elements of the quality control system of auditing firms, which is considered in the auditing standards. The literature review shows that this issue has not been studied in Iran. However, some Iranian certified public accountants and audit firm partners have pointed out some obstacles of implementing quality control reviews in the form of notes and roundtables published in professional journals. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has described the key issues of quality control review in the United States in 2023 in a report entitled " SPOTLIGHT: Inspection Observations Related to Engagement Quality Reviews". This report shows that there are still many concerns about the quality control review (PCAOB, 2023).

Methodology

Considering the nature of the research problem, which is subjective and relies on the experience of audit institution partners, the application of a qualitative research approach is deemed appropriate. Additionally, since no specific theory has elucidated this phenomenon and there has been no prior research in this area, the use of grounded theory is fitting. Conducting interviews is one of the main methods of data collection in grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin,1990). Therefore, research data have been collected through interviews. Interviews were conducted with 25 partners of audit firms in the spring and summer of 2023. It is noteworthy that in grounded theory, all information is considered as data (Danai Fred et al., 2013). Hence, discussions, roundtables or articles published by 12 Iranian certified public accountants in professional journals or newspapers were also used as data. In the qualitative method of research, unlike the quantitative approach, statistical sampling is not important and sampling is judgmental. That is, people who have the most experience and involvement with the studied phenomenon are selected. Interviews with participants continue until theoretical saturation is reached, meaning that new participants do not introduce new insights beyond what has already been discussed.The interviews are then transcribed, and conceptual tags are attached to each sentence or paragraph of the text. In grounded theory, data analysis is done in three stages: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. In this research, three methods were used to analyze the data.

Results

After conducting the research and data analysis, it is found that there are various obstacles in various dimensions for the application of quality control in Iranian audit firms. These obstacles were extracted in the form of conceptual tags. Based on selective coding, they were classified into different categories. To provide a comprehensible presentation of the barriers, these conceptual labels were categorized and presented in the form of inputs, processes, outputs, consequences, and contextual factors. Presenting these conceptual labels of obstacles in different dimensions helps us to have an accurate picture of the causes and obstacles so that we can adopt strategies to solve them. Some of the most important obstacles are: the structure and organization of some audit firms, the small size of many audit firms, economic considerations, low fees of Iranian audit firms, lack of qualified auditors, moral issues in the society, the society's specific problems, governing laws and regulations, weaknesses in quality grading of audit firms, inadequate communication with international professional communities, low awareness of auditing, and lack of development, and low application of technology in Iranian audit firms.

Discussion

In this research, after analyzing the data, many obstacles are extracted in various dimensions. These factors limit the effective implementation of engagement quality control review as one of the key elements of the audit quality control system. With these conditions, achieving audit quality becomes challenging.

Conclusion

In this research, the obstacles to the application of quality control review in Iranian audit firms were examined. The findings show that there are many obstacles in different dimensions. The structure and organization of some audit firm, the small size of many audit firms, economic considerations, low fees of Iranian audit firms, lack of qualified auditors, moral issues in the society, the society's specific problems, governing laws and regulations, weaknesses in quality grading of audit firms, inadequate communication with international professional communities, low awareness of auditing and lack of development, and low application of technology in Iranian audit firms are the main obstacles to the application of engagement quality control review in Iranian audit firms. If these obstacles are not removed, the audit quality of Iranian audit firms will be affected. Additionally, in the present circumstances, it cannot be assured that professional standards will be fully followed. This research is the first Iranian research that has studied this issue and can be an avenue for future research. Future research could study other stakeholders or rank these obstacles. Furthermore, conducting similar research in the future will clarify the extent to which these obstacles can be overcome. The findings of this research can provide a clear perspective on engagement quality control review in Iranian audit firms and its obstacles to regulators, such as the Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants (IACPA). One suggestion arising from the findings could be to increase the weight of the scores related to the engagement quality control review. Another suggestion would be to promote and clarify the benefits of engagement quality control review for audit firms. The last suggestion is the training of competent quality control reviewers by the AICPA or other educational and professional centers.
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge the participants in this research who helped us.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

  1.  
  2. Abbott, L., Buslepp, W. L., Marquardt, B. B., & Merrell, S. (2‌0‌2‌2‌). Does an Audit Office’s Quality Control System Impact Audit Quality? Evidence from Audit Report Errors, Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3‌7‌0‌4‌0‌4‌0‌ or https://dx.doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌1‌3‌9‌/ssrn.3‌7‌0‌4‌0‌4‌0‌
  3. Bedard, J. C., Deis, D. R., Curtis, M. B., & Jenkins, J. G. (2‌0‌0‌8‌). Risk monitoring and control in audit firms:A research synthesis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 2‌7‌(2‌), 1‌8‌7‌–2‌1‌8‌. http://dx.doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌3‌0‌8‌/aud.2‌0‌0‌8‌.2‌7‌.1‌.1‌8‌7‌
  4. Dickins, D., Fay, R., Daugherty, B. (2‌0‌1‌5‌). For better or worse: A study of auditors’ practices under Auditing Standard No. 7‌, Research in Accounting Regulation, 2‌7‌(2‌), 1‌7‌4‌-1‌8‌6‌. doi: 1‌0‌.1‌0‌1‌6‌/j.racreg.2‌0‌1‌5‌.0‌9‌.0‌0‌8‌
  5. Emby, C., & Marchesi, M. F. (2‌0‌0‌5‌). The Impact of Continuity on Concurring Partner Reviews: An Exploratory Study, Accounting Horizons, 1‌9‌(1‌), 1‌–1‌0‌. DOI:1‌0‌.2‌3‌0‌8‌/acch.2‌0‌0‌5‌.1‌9‌.1‌.1‌
  6. Entwistle, G.M., & Lindsay, D. (2‌0‌0‌2‌). Audit partner judgment: the effects of concurring reviews. compensation practices, and accounting flexibility, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2‌9‌8‌4‌2‌8‌.
  7. Epps, K., & Messier Jr, W.F. (2‌0‌0‌6‌). Engagement quality reviews: a comparison of audit firm
    practices
    , working paper, Georgia State University/Kennesaw State University, Atlanta, GA.
  8. Epps, K. K., & Messier, W. F. (2‌0‌0‌7‌). Engagement quality reviews: a comparison of audit firm practices. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 2‌6‌(2‌), 1‌6‌7‌–1‌8‌1‌. DOI:1‌0‌.2‌3‌0‌8‌/aud.2‌0‌0‌7‌.2‌6‌.2‌.1‌6‌7‌
  9. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2‌0‌1‌4‌). A Framework for Audit Quality Key Elements That Create An Environment For Audit Quality, February.
  10. Jamal, K., Johnson, P. E., & Berryman, R. G. (1‌9‌9‌5‌). Detecting framing effects in financial statements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 1‌2‌(2‌), 8‌5‌–1‌0‌5‌. 1‌0‌.1‌1‌1‌1‌/j.1‌9‌1‌1‌-3‌8‌4‌6‌.1‌9‌9‌5‌.tb0‌0‌4‌8‌2‌.x
  11. Kraut, M., & Davidson, R. (1‌9‌9‌8‌). Effects of incentives and risks on decisions made by engagement and review partners. Northwest Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2‌9‌–4‌1‌.
  12. Luehlfing, M. S., Copley, P. A., & Shockley, R. A. (1‌9‌9‌5‌). An examination of the relationship between audit-related risks and the second partner review. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 1‌0‌(1‌), 4‌3‌–5‌0‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌7‌7‌/0‌1‌4‌8‌5‌5‌8‌X9‌5‌0‌1‌0‌0‌0‌1‌0‌4‌
  13. Matsamura, E. M., & Tucker, R. R. (1‌9‌9‌5‌). Second partner review: An analytical model. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 1‌0‌(1‌), 1‌7‌3‌–2‌0‌0‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌7‌7‌/0‌1‌4‌8‌5‌5‌8‌X9‌5‌0‌1‌0‌0‌0‌1‌1‌3‌
  14. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2‌0‌0‌9‌). PCAOB release No. 2‌0‌0‌9‌-0‌0‌1‌, Proposed Auditing Standard – Engagement Quality Review.
  15. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2‌0‌1‌3‌). PCAOB release No. 2‌0‌1‌3‌-0‌1‌1‌. Observations related to the implementation of the auditing standard on engagement quality review.
  16. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Post-Implementation Review of AS 1‌2‌2‌0‌, Engagement Quality Review, October.
  17. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2‌0‌2‌1‌). SPOTLIGHT Staff Update and Preview of 2‌0‌2‌1‌ Inspection Observations, October.
  18. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2‌0‌2‌3‌). SPOTLIGHT Inspection Observations Related to Engagement Quality Reviews, October.
  19. Schneider, A., & Messier Jr, W. F. (2‌0‌0‌7‌). Engagement quality review: Insights from the academic literature. Managerial Auditing Journal, 2‌2‌(8‌), 8‌2‌3‌–8‌3‌9‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌0‌8‌/0‌2‌6‌8‌6‌9‌0‌0‌7‌1‌0‌8‌1‌9‌6‌6‌1‌
  20. Tan, H. (1‌9‌9‌5‌). Effects of expectations, prior involvement, and review awareness on memory for audit evidence and judgment. Journal of Accounting Research, 3‌3‌ (1‌), 1‌1‌3‌–1‌3‌5‌.  http://hdl.handle.net/1‌0‌.2‌3‌0‌7‌/2‌4‌9‌1‌2‌9‌5‌
  21. Tucker, R. R., & Matsamura, E. M. (1‌9‌9‌7‌). EQR: An experimental economics investigation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 1‌6‌(1‌), 7‌9‌–9‌8‌. http://dx.doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌1‌3‌9‌/ssrn.3‌0‌4‌4‌0‌2‌
  22. Abolmaali, KhadijehKh. (2‌0‌1‌2‌). Qualitative research from theory to practice. Nashr-e-elm publication, First Edition, Tehran. [In Persian]
  23. Alavi, Sid MohammadS.M. (2‌0‌1‌9‌). Factors and obstacles of audit quality in Iran. Certified Accountant's Quarterly, No. 4‌6‌, Summer,PP 2‌8‌-3‌9 [In Persian]
  24. Asqarian, Mohammad M.S.Saeid. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). External and internal factors affecting the audit quality. Auditor's Journal, No 1‌1‌1‌, PP 1‌-7‌. [In Persian].
  25. Danayeefard, H., Alvani, S.M., Azar, A. (2‌0‌1‌3‌). Qualitative research methodology in management: a comprehensive approach, Saffar publication, 2‌th Edition, Tehran. [In Persian] (In Persian).
  26. Hovansianfar,G. (2‌0‌1‌2‌). Certified Audit Firms, Donya-e-Eqtesad, Iranian daily newspaper, newspaper No 2‌7‌4‌0‌, News No 3‌9‌6‌4‌1‌3‌, [In Persian].
  27. Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants [(IACPA]). (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Audit engagement quality control checklist, Available at: https://www.iacpa.ir/ [In Persian].
  28. Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants [(IACPA]). (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Audit Firm Quality control checklist, Available at: https://www.iacpa.ir/ [In Persian].
  29. Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants (IACPA).2‌0‌2‌0‌. Laws and regulations of Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants (IACPA), Available at: https://www.iacpa.ir/, [In Persian].Keyhani, H. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). When is the merger of audit Firms? How? Why? And its obstacles, Certified Accountant's Quarterly journal, No 5‌0‌, 2‌7‌-3‌0‌, [In Persian].
  30. Keyhani, H. (2‌0‌2‌3‌). An introduction to international quality management standards, Certified Accountant's Quarterly journal, No 6‌2‌, 5‌2‌-5‌8‌, [In Persian].
  31. Mehrani, S., & Eskandar, H. (2‌0‌1‌7‌). Explaining of Modeling the Auditor- Client Negotiations Paradigm Concerning Financial Reporting. Empirical Research in Accounting6‌(4‌), 1‌4‌3‌-1‌7‌0‌doi: 1‌0‌.2‌2‌0‌5‌1‌/jera.2‌0‌1‌7‌.2‌6‌2‌3‌ [In Persian]
  32. Nikbakht, M. R., Rezaee, Z., & Mennati, V. (2‌0‌1‌7‌). Internal Audit Quality Improvement Strategies. Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting1‌4‌(5‌5‌), 3‌1‌-7‌0. doi: 1‌0‌.2‌2‌0‌5‌4‌/qjma.2‌0‌1‌7‌.2‌4‌9‌5‌6‌.1‌6‌6‌3‌ [In Persian]
  33. Securities and Exchange Organization of Iran. (2‌0‌0‌7‌). Registered Audit Firms requirements, Available at: https://www.Seo.ir/, [In Persian] .
  34. Shalileh, M., Ghafari, A., Moghbeli, A., Rasi, J., Taei, M. (2‌0‌0‌5‌). Roundtable; Audit quality control, Auditor's Journal,No 3‌0‌, PP 3‌3‌-4‌3‌ [In Persian].
  35. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1‌9‌9‌8‌). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2‌nd ed, Translated to Persian by Boyook Mohammadi, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, 2‌0‌1‌4‌, [In Persian].
  36. Tavakoli, N., Shalileh, M., Safaar, M.J., Razaagh, N., Salleh, N., Mousavidavar, S.A. (2‌0‌1‌8‌(. Roundtable; Improving the requirements of quality control review of audit engagement - Auditing standard 1‌ and 2‌2‌0‌, Auditor's Journal, No 1‌1‌1‌, PP 3‌8‌-4‌9‌. [(In Persian]
  37. Tavakoli, N., Shalileh, M., Safaar, M.J., Razaagh, N., Salleh, N., Mousavidavar, S.A.2‌0‌1‌8‌. Roundtable; Improving the requirements of quality control review of audit engagement - Auditing standard 1‌ and 2‌2‌0‌, Auditor's Journal,No 1‌1‌1‌, PP 3‌8‌-4‌9‌, [In Persian].