감사법인특성과 감사시간,감사법인특성 결합효과의 감사품질 관련성 = Audit Firm Characteristics, Audit Hours Combined therewith, and Audit Quality

국문 초록 (Abstract)

감사인의 품질관리감리 결과에 기초한 선행연구(Hermanson et al. 2007; 김문철·전영순 2010)에서는 감사인의 품질관리시스템 구성요소 중 인적자원관리 항목이 양호한 감사품질과 관련이 있음을 보고하였다. 본 연구는 위 선행연구에서 설명한 감사법인특성 및 감사인 소속 전문인력의 전문경력기간의 감사품질 관련성을 실증조사한다. 또한 위 감사법인특성들(감사인조직차원 감사품질지표)과 초과감사시간(개별감사업무차원 감사품질지표)의 결합효과가 갖는 감사품질 관련성도 추가조사한다. 감사품질의 대용치로는 다음 사업연도 재무제표에 전기오류수정손익을 보고했는지 여부를 사용하였다. 연구 결과, 감사법인특성들의 회계오류 관련성은 항목별로 차이가 있었다. 즉, 감사인의 전문성과 인력레버리지 관련 지표는 회계오류 감소와 유의한 관련이 있고, 비감사업무 부담 관련 지표는 회계오류 증가와 유의한 관련이 있었다. 반면에, 감사경험기간과 회계사 1인당 상장회사 수는 회계오류발생과 유의한 관련이 없었지만 초과감사시간과 상호작용효과는 회계오류 감소와 유의한 관련이 있었다. 또한 인력레버리지 비율과 파트너 1인당 비감사보수가 높을 경우에는, 초과감사시간 변수가 유의한 음의 계수 값을 가졌지만 이 변수들과 초과감사시간의 상호작용은 이러한 회계오류 개선정도를 일부 줄이는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 조사결과는, 선행연구에서 보고한 인적자원관리 관련 감사법인특성들의 감사품질 관련성이 항목 별로 차이가 있으므로, 이들을 감사인의 감사품질지표로 사용하기 위해서는 주요 특성변수 별로 상이한 고려가 필요함 을 나타낸다. 이 결과는 감사품질지표로 단일지표보다는 다양한 지표를 활용하는 것이 필요하다는 선행연구(Bedard et al. 2010)의 주장을 뒷받침하는 것이다. 본 연구의 공헌점은 감사법인특성들이 항목별로 감사품질과 관련성이 상이함을 실증 확인한 것이다. 대표적으로, 선행연구에서 감사인의 인력레버리지 지표인 보조자-파트너 비율이 감사인의 감사품질지표로 활용 가능함과, 감사인 소속 회계사의 전문경력기간이 길더라도 그 자체로는 감사품질 개선효과가 없고 개별감사업무차원의 감사투입노력이 동시에 증가하는 경우에는 감사품질 개선효과가 있음을 확인하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession(ACAP)(2008) and International Organization of Securities Commission(IOSCO)(2009) suggested that it is necessary to develop audit quality indicators to be included in the transparency reports of the audit firms. It also presented possible examples of the audit quality indicators classified into input and output measures. Input measures include experience (including industry experience), competency, technical resources, employee workloads, and leverage (such as associate-to-partner ratios and the percentage of senior engagement team member time spent on an audit to the total audit time for all team members). Output measures include revenue information (such as revenues by service line [e.g., audit, tax, consulting, and other], geographic region, and industry), independence violation, disciplinary proceedings and legal matters. Bedard et al.(2010) categorized the audit quality indicators in terms of firm-level versus engagement-level indicators, as well as in terms of inputs and output measures, which are consistent with the quality control standards defined by ISQC 1 (International Standard on Quality Control No. 1)(International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board[IAASB] 2004). They argued that a single audit quality indicator is not a focus, rather they are to require reporting a number of different indicators so that the combination gives a multi-dimensional picture of audit quality. Researches related to audit quality in line with the argument include Hermanson et al.(2007) and Kim and Cheon(2010) which reported that, according to quality control investigations by U. S. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) and the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), certain audit firm characteristics related to human capital management could affect the auditors` quality control system, and, accordingly, are significantly associated with their audit quality. The above studies referred to various audit firm characteristics such as the associate-to-partner ratio, the professional staff-to-total employee ratio, and average involvement of partners or professional staffs per public company client. Based on these studies, I empirically tested what audit firm characteristics are significantly associated with the audit quality. Also, I see whether the average length of audit experience by the audit firms` professionals are associated with the audit quality. This is to examine controversy in Korea whether audit quality of large- and small-sized audit firms are different or not; ones argue that large firms have better quality while the others explain that their quality differences are not significant since small firms` professionals have longer experiences in average to compensate for the less organized firm. In addition, I note that the above audit firm characteristics are firm-level indicators as categorized by International Standard on Quality Control No 1.(ISQC 1)(IAASB 2004) and Bedard et al.(2010); I examined the combined effects of the firm-level indicators and (excess) audit hours on audit quality. Audit hour is an engagement-level indicator explained by Bedard et al. (2010) representing input of audit efforts in the engagement level. Prior period adjustments reported in the subsequent year were used as audit quality proxy. Samples are 1,584 firm-years of non-financial public companies listed in the Korea Stock Exchange with fiscal years ending December 31 from 2003 to 2009, which comprise of 503 firm-year of test samples (error firms) and 1,081 firm-year of control samples. I found that various audit firm characteristics are differently associated with audit quality; i.e. their significance and directions (positive or negative relationship) are not consistent. Specifically, variables representing auditor competency (average audit fees per partner) and audit firm`s human capital leverage (the associate-to- partner ratio, the registered CPA-to-partner ratio, and the professional staff-to- total employee ratio) are significantly associated with good audit quality (i.e. lower prior period adjustments reported in the subsequent year). A variable representing auditor workloads (average non-audit fees per professionals) is significantly associated with bad audit quality. The numbers of public company clients per professional staff or partner do not have significant relationship with audit quality. In addition, the combined effects of the audit firm characteristics and excess audit hours are not consistent, either. Specifically, if the average number of listed company clients per professionals are larger, then incremental improvements in audit quality upon more excess audit hours become higher. However, if the audit firm`s human capital leverages are higher, then the combined effects of the characteristics and excess audit hours made their aggregate audit quality improvements smaller. Similarly, if the average non-audit fees per partner is larger, then the combined effects of the characteristics and excess audit hours made their aggregate audit quality improvements smaller, too. These results indicate that various audit firm characteristics, and excess audit hours combined therewith, have different associations with the auditors` audit quality in terms of significance and directions (positive or negative relationship). Meanwhile, average length of audit experience of professionals belong to the auditors didn`t show significant relationship with audit quality, but its combined effect with excess audit hours is significantly associated with good audit quality. This result also has regulatory implication because it negates the argument that small or medium-sized audit firms do not necessarily have worse audit quality because of length of audit experience are longer than those of large audit firms. This study`s contribution is to find that various audit firm characteristics have different association with audit quality in terms of significance and directions. Specifically, I found that associate-to-partner ratio, a proxy for audit firm`s human capital leverage, could be used as an audit quality indicator. Also, average length of audit experiences of the individual professionals who belong to the audit firms, is not associated with audit quality; rather its combined effects with excess audit hours representing the audit efforts in the engagement-levels only showed significant association with good audit quality.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이재맹, "전기오류수정에 대한 정책변경의 효과 : 손익조정 대 이익잉여금조정" 한국회계학회 30 (30): 65-98, 2005

2 김문철, "외부감사인에 대한 품질관리감리제도의 문제점 및 개선방안" 한국회계학회 20 (20): 67-100, 2011

3 마희영, "비정상 감사시간 및 감사보수가 오류발생에 미치는 영향" 한국공인회계사회 (51) : 119-155, 2010

4 최정호, "감사품질과 신규상장기업의 이익조정" 한국회계학회 31 (31): 113-144, 2006

5 이재은, "감사인의 품질관리제도 영향 요소와 감사품질의 관련성: 금감원 품질관리감리 대상, 외국 회계감독기구 등록 여부 및 조직운영방식 유형을 중심으로" 한국회계학회 36 (36): 125-181, 2011

6 송혁준, "감사인의 비감사 서비스 제공과 기업의 전기오류수정 사이의 관계" 한국회계학회 33 (33): 77-110, 2008

7 Hansen, M., "What's Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge" 1-10, 1999

8 International Organization of Securities Commission, "Transparency of Firms that Audit Public Companies. Technical Committee Consultation Report (September 2009)" Technical Committee of the International Organization of Securities Commission 2009

9 Galanter, M, "Tournament of Lawyers: The Transformation of the Big Law Firm Chapter 5. Explaining Big-Firm Growth and Change: The Promotion-to-Partner Tournament" The University of Chicago Press 1991

10 Palmrose, Z, "The Relation of Audit Contract Type to Audit Fees and Hours" 64 (64): 488-499, 1989

11 Banker, R., "The Public Accounting Industry Production Function" 35 : 255-281, 2003

12 O’Keefe, T., "The Production of Audit Services: Evidence from a Major Public Accounting Firm" 32 : 241-261, 1994

13 European Union, "The Eighth Company Law Directive Article 40" 2006

14 Becker, C., "The Effect of Audit Quality on Earnings Management" 15 : 1-24, 1998

15 Krishnan, J., "The Differentiation of Quality Among Auditors: Evidence from the Not-for-profit Sector" 9-25, 2000

16 Hilary, G., "The Credibility of Self-Regulation: Evidence from the Accounting Profession’s Peer-Review Program" 40 : 211-229, 2005

17 Eichenseher, J., "The Analysis of Industry-Specific Auditor Concentration: Towards and Explanatory Model" 56 (56): 479-492, 1981

18 Financial Supervisory Service, "Results of FSS's Regulatory Review on the Korean Auditors' Quality Control System" Financial Supervisory Service 2010

19 Kwon, S. Y, "Research for Improvements in the Regulatory Review Systems for Auditors' Quality Control. KICPA Research Report" the Korean Institute of Certified Public Accountants 2010

20 Liu, X., "Profit Sharing in An Auditing Oligopoly" 80 (80): 677-692, 2005

21 Hermanson, D., "PCAOB Inspections of Smaller CPA Firms: Initial Evidence from Inspection Reports" 21 (21): 137-152, 2007

22 Gunny, K., "PCAOB Inspection Reports and Audit Quality" University of Colorado 2009

23 Kim, M. C, "Measurement and Evaluations of Auditors’ Quality Control System" FSS 1-109, 2010

24 Brody, R. G., "Mandatory Auditor Rotation" National Public Accountants 32-36, 1998

25 Sherer, P, "Leveraging Human Assets in Law Firms: Human Capital Structures and Organizational Capabilities" 48 (48): 671-691, 1995

26 Kordana, K, "Law Firms and Associate Careers: Tournament Theory versus the Production-Imperative Model" 104 (104): 1907-1934, 1995

27 Casterella, J, "Is Self-Regulated Peer Review Effective at Signaling Audit Quality" 84 : 183-199, 2009

28 International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, "International Standard on Quality Control No. 1(ISQC 1): Quality Control for Firms That Perform Audits and Reviews of Historical Financial Information, and Other Assurance and Related Services Engagements" The International Federation of Accountants 2004

29 DeFond M., "Incidence and Circumstances of Accounting Errors" 66 : 643-655, 1991

30 Summers, S., "Fraudulently Misstated Financial Statements and Insider Trading: An Empirical Analysis" 73 : 131-146, 1998

31 Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, "Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S" Treasury Department 2008

32 Myers, J, "Exploring the Term of the Auditor-Client Relationship and the Quality of Earnings: A Case for Mandatory Auditor Rotation?" 78 (78): 779-799, 2003

33 Choi, K., "Empirical Study on Earnings Manipulation by the Companies whose Accounting Errors Were Detected in the FSS's Regulatory Review" 23 : 133-161, 1998

34 Ng, T., "Effects of Authoritative Guidance Availability and Audit Committee Effectiveness on Auditors’ Judgements in an Auditor-Client Negotiation Context" 78 (78): 801-818, 2003

35 Kim, M. C., "Effects of Audit Quality Difference on Prior Period Earnings Adjustments" 23 (23): 1-26, 1998

36 Krishnan, G., "Does Big 6 Auditor Industry Expertise Constrain Earnings Management?" Accounting Horizons 1-16, 2003

37 Ashbaugh, H, "Do Non-audit Services Compromise Auditor Independence? Further Evidence" 78 : 611-639, 2003

38 Financial Supervisory Service, "Discussion Material for Partners Responsible For Auditor Quality Control System" Financial Supervisory Service 2011

39 Leventis, S., "Determinants of Audit Time as a Proxy of Audit Quality" 20 (20): 460-478, 2005

40 Deis, Jr., D, "Determinants of Audit Quality in the Public Sector" 67 (67): 462-479, 1992

41 Bedard, J, "Commentary on Audit Quality Indicators: A Status Update on Possible Public Disclosures and Insights from Audit Practice" 4 (4): 12-19, 2010

42 Dee, C., "Client Stock Market Reaction to PCAOB Sanctions Against a Big Four Auditor" Contemporary Accounting Research 2010

43 Chung, H, "Client Importance, Non-audit Services, and Abnormal Accruals" 78 : 931-955, 2003

44 DeAngelo, L, "Auditor Size and Auditor Quality" 3 : 183-199, 1981

45 Romanus, R., "Auditor Industry Specialization, Auditor Changes, and Accounting Restatements" 22 (22): 389-413, 2008

46 Lennox, C, "Auditing the Auditors: Evidence on the Recent Reforms to the External Monitoring of Audit Firms" 49 : 84-103, 2010

47 Sohn, S. K, "Auditing Theory, Regulation and Application" Bakyoung Printing Corp 2006

48 Kinney Jr. W, "Audit technology and preferences for auditing standards" 8 (8): 73-89, 1986

49 Audit Standards Board, "Audit Standards 220, Audit Quality Controls. Korean Audit Standards"

50 Lee, H. Y, "Associations between the Quality of Earnings and Audit Report Lag and Management Discretionary Report Lag" Korea Accounting Association Symposium Research Report 2007