Ilias G. Basioudis, Paul de Lange, Themin Suwardy and Paul Wells
The purpose of this study is to investigate student perceptions of the design features included in an “off the shelf” Learning Management System (LMS) in teaching undergraduate…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to investigate student perceptions of the design features included in an “off the shelf” Learning Management System (LMS) in teaching undergraduate accounting students.
Design/methodology/approach
Questionnaire responses from 846 accounting students studying in the UK, Australia and New Zealand provide international data to develop a model to explain student perception of the LMS.
Findings
The final model shows student satisfaction with the use of a LMS is positively associated with three variables: usefulness of lecture notes, bulletin boards and discussion forums, and other LMS tools. Further, the comparison of cultural differences of the three countries shows all students treat the provision of notes as a desirable attribute on a LMS. Findings also suggest that although students find the provision of materials over the LMS does not enhance student engagement in class, overall a comparison of the three countries shows all students treat the provision of notes as a desirable attribute of a LMS.
Research limitations/implications
Future research should collect ethnicity data to enable an analysis of cultural influence on student perceptions of the LMS.
Practical implications
As increased motivation to learn is found to contribute to improved achievement of learning outcomes, the study's findings have implications for faculty contemplating the adoption of a LMS in their courses. The findings specifically confirm that usefulness of lecture notes, use of bulletin/discussion boards, and other LMS tools are positively endorsed by students and hence increase their motivation to learn.
Originality/value
The current paper adds to the literature as the motivation to use and engage with LMSs by accounting students is not well understood.
Details
Keywords
Tatiana Mazza, Stefano Azzali and Andrey Simonov
This study aims to examine whether national industry expertise in Italy is more dominant than local expertise. Prior studies from Australia, USA and UK show that audit fees for…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to examine whether national industry expertise in Italy is more dominant than local expertise. Prior studies from Australia, USA and UK show that audit fees for industry experts are priced at a higher premium at the local level than the national level. These countries have voluntary audit firm rotation, while Italy has mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR). The authors predict that Italy has a stronger national than local level of industry expertise, to better retain and transfer industry expertise.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors compare audit fee premiums of national industry experts to local levels, using quantitative (multivariate tests) and qualitative (interviews) methodology.
Findings
Using hand-collected audit fees, the authors find that the audit fee premium for industry expertise is greater at the national level than the local level. The authors find corroborating results with audit hours. To provide further support, the authors conduct analysis for a neighboring country that does not have audit firm rotation. Using hand-collected data from Germany, the authors find that audit fee premiums from national industry expertise are no different from local industry expertise.
Originality/value
The present study study has theoretical and practical implications, for European Union countries, which recently adopted MAFR and for countries considering adoption in the future.
Details
Keywords
– The aim of this paper is to provide evidence on the extent and the consequences of the provision of non-audit services (NAS) by statutory auditors to German family firms.
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this paper is to provide evidence on the extent and the consequences of the provision of non-audit services (NAS) by statutory auditors to German family firms.
Design/methodology/approach
The study analyzes hand collected fee data of 368 listed and private family firms in Germany. It employs univariate tests, ordinary least squares and two-stage least squares regressions to investigate potential threats to perceived auditor independence and knowledge spillovers between jointly provided NAS and audit services.
Findings
Incumbent auditors are shown to be a significant source of various types of NAS to family firms. There is weak evidence on threats to perceived auditor independence and support for reciprocal knowledge spillovers between the services. While listed and private family firms do not differ in regard to the proportion of NAS fees, comparative findings suggest that key threats and benefits of jointly provided services are more prevalent among private than among listed family firms.
Research limitations/implications
The study suffers from limited data availability and is restricted to the initial year of mandatory audit fee disclosure of private firms in Germany. Particularities of family firms and the German setting, as well as differential results for listed and private family firms, suggest fruitful avenues for future research.
Practical implications
The study addresses the current issues in audit regulation. Regulatory bodies should consider that key threats and benefits of auditor-provided NAS decrease with stronger exogenous restrictions. Attempts to restrict jointly provided services in the EU suggest family firms to reconsider their reliance on auditors as a trusted source of NAS.
Originality/value
This study is the first to provide evidence on the extent and consequences of auditor-provided NAS in family firms based on fee disclosure. It is also among the few studies that investigate private firms in a code law country and complements prior evidence from Germany that is restricted to listed firms. More generally, it contributes to limited evidence at the intersection of audit and family business research.
Details
Keywords
Michael Kend and Lan Anh Nguyen
The purpose of this exploratory study is to better understand the interactions between external auditors, their audit clients and audit regulators when considering the supply of…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this exploratory study is to better understand the interactions between external auditors, their audit clients and audit regulators when considering the supply of and demand for high-level audit technology. The authors examine the developed markets of Australia, New Zealand and the UK to better understand: how high-level audit technology has started to become embedded into existing audit spaces and any emerging issues this technology has created for the audit profession.
Design/methodology/approach
Through the theoretical lens of the socio-technical (ST) systems of innovation theory, the present study involved semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand from 2019 to 2020 and 21 stakeholders in the UK from 2016 to 2018.
Findings
Advancements are revitalizing the technologies of not only the external auditors and their firms but also of their audit clients. Although the audit model is changing, external auditors are reported to be reluctant to fully engage with new audit technologies. In this setting, the authors find audit rules are yet to become embedded in the objects or practices of ST systems and that keeping up with the pace of change for regulators and standard setters is a major challenge.
Practical implications
The findings of this study raise call for regulators to be more up to speed with these new technological changes, as audit standards need to be amended accordingly. Although the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board deliberates, both clients and auditors need to lobby for specific audit data analytics regulations.
Originality/value
The present study provides perspectives about new audit practices that emerge due to high-level technological advancements and then embed themselves into existing audit spaces. The authors draw on several different stakeholder groups, not just the Big Four firms. The ST systems theoretical lens we adopt better helps us understand how audit firms at the organisational level are adapting to these new technological changes in existing audit spaces.