A Model for Assessment of the Risk of Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Ph.D. Candidat of Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran.

10.22103/jak.2020.15880.3254

Abstract

Objective: Fraudulent financial reporting is a major concern of the audit profession. In this regard, auditors are responsible according to auditing standards. Given the importance of identification and assessment of the risk of fraud in an audit of financial statements and the importance of responses of auditors, the purpose of this study is to provide a model for identification and assessment of the risks of material misstatement due to fraud in an audit of financial statements.
 
Methods: In order to achieve this goal, firstly, researches in this field were studied to identify the effective indicators on assessment of the risk of fraud and other effective indicators were extracted by interviewing experts. Experts' opinion on the extracted indicators was collected through a questionnaire and were agreed upon through using Fuzzy Delphi method and expert opinion poll. Subsequently, confirmatory factor analysis test was used to determine the factor load of each indicator of each component. The relationship between the influence of different indicators on assessment of the risk of fraud in the form of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was tested and the research model was presented.
 
Results: The results of the study showed that 146 out of 162 indicators extracted from theoretical foundations and researches and interviews, in the form of 5 components, reached the Delphi group general consensus and the results of performing a confirmatory factor analysis showed 144 indicators were of sufficient importance.
 
Conclusion: The components that influence the assessment of the risk of fraud in an audit of financial statements, importance respectively, are: the characteristics of the client, the characteristics of the audit firm, the characteristics of performing the audit, the environmental characteristics and the personal characteristics of the auditor.
Of the 53 indicators approved in the component of client characteristics, five important indicators are: lack of sufficient managers experience; lack of fair dealing with staff; lack of appropriate work environment for employees; lack of job security; ignoring the need to monitor or reduce the risks associated with assets misappropriation.
Of the 23 indicators approved in the component of audit firm characteristics, five important indicators are: having sufficient auditing tools; auditor access to databases; giving auditors reasonable rights and benefits; adequate investment in auditing; and fair dealing with Auditors.
Of the 27 indicators approved in the component of the characteristics of performing the audit, five important indicators are: adjusting the audit plan and auditing tests in responses to fraud risk factors; adequate understanding of the client and its environment, including internal controls; appropriate allocation and oversight of the audit team; the discussion among audit team members; and auditor access to databases.
Of the 19 indicators approved in the component of environmental characteristics, five important indicators are: lack of culture of accountability and answering; sophisticated rules and regulations; numerous laws and regulations; lack of independent oversight bodies; and inexpressive laws and regulations.
Of the 22 indicators approved in the component of personal characteristics of the auditor, five important indicators are: Ability to properly understand evidence and identify evidence inconsistent with other evidence; knowledge and awareness of fraud; responsibility; confidence; ability to identification of intentional identified misstatements.

Keywords

References

اعتمادی، حسین؛ عبدلی، لیلا. (1396). کیفیت حسابرسی و تقلب در صورت‌های مالی. دانش حسابداری مالی، 4(4)، 23-43.
بنی‌مهد، بهمن؛ گل‌محمدی، آرش. (1396). بررسی رابطه میان جو اخلاقی و هشداردهی در مورد تقلب از طریق مدل گزارشگری اختیاری در حرفه حسابرسی ایران. حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری، 2(3)، 86-61.
بولو، قاسم؛ صادقی، پیمان. (1389). اثر ویژگی‌های اخلاقی فردی حسابرسان بر استفاده از راهنمای تصمیم در کشف تقلب مدیریت. اخلاق در علوم و فناوری، 5(3 و 4)، 83-74.
پورحیدری، امید؛ بذرافشان، سعید. (1390). اهمیت بسترهای خطر تقلب از دیدگاه حسابرسان مستقل. حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی، 3 (10)، 25-1.
پورحیدری، امید؛ بذرافشان، سعید. (1391). بررسی سودمندی استفاده از چک لیست راهنمای کشف تقلب در ارزیابی خطر تقلب. پژوهش‌های تجربی حسابداری، 1(3)، 86-69.
تشدیدی، الهه؛ سپاسی، سحر؛ اعتمادی، حسین؛ آذر، عادل. (1398). ارائه رویکردی نوین در پیش‌بینی و کشف تقلب صورت‌های مالی با استفاده از الگوریتم زنبور عسل. دانش حسابداری، 10(3)، 167-139.
حامدیان، حامد؛ وحیدی الیزی، ابراهیم. (1388). برداشت حسابرسان ایران از کارایی علائم خطر در کشف گزارشگری مالی متقلبانه. تحقیقات حسابداری، 3، 197-162.
رهروی دستجردی، علیرضا؛ فروغی، داریوش؛ کیانی، غلامحسین. (1397). ارزیابی خطر تقلب مدیران با استفاده از روش داده‌کاوی. دانش حسابداری، 9(1)، 114-91.
صفرزاده، محمدحسین. (1389). توانایی نسبت‌های مالی در کشف تقلب در گزارشگری مالی: تحلیل لاجیت. دانش حسابداری، 1(1)، 163-137.
فروغی، داریوش؛ خالقی، محسن؛ رسائیان، امیر. (1391). مفهوم اهمیت در حسابرسی صورت‌های مالی و تأثیر آن بر توجه حسابرسان در فرآیند کشف تقلب مدیران. پیشرفت‌های حسابداری دانشگاه شیراز، 4(3)، 135-111.
مسیح‌آبادی، ابوالقاسم؛ سرچمی؛ محمد. (1396). توانایی رویکردهای فازی در کشف تقلب در گزارشگری مالی و مقایسه کارایی آنها. دانش حسابداری، 8(4)، 190-161.
مهدوی، غلامحسین؛ قهرمانی، علیرضا. (1396). ارائه الگویی برای کشف تقلب به وسیله حسابرسان با استفاده از شبکه عصبی مصنوعی. دانش حسابرسی، 17(67)، 70-45.
References
Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (2008). Final report of the advisory committee on the auditing profession to the U.S. department of the treasury. washington, D.C.: Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession.
Banimahd, B., Golmohamadi, A. (2017). Investigating the relationship between ethical climate and whistleblowing through optional reporting model in Iran's audit profession. Iranian Journal of Value and Behavioral Accountings Achievements, 2(3), 61-86 [In Persian].
Bell, T.B., Carcello, J.V. (2000). A decision aid for assessing the likelihood of fraudulent financial reporting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 19(1), 169-183.
Bolo, G., Sadeghi, P. (2011). Individual ethical characteristics of charter accountants in use of decision guide for assessing management fraud. Journal of Ethics in Science and Technology, 5(3 & 4), 74-83 [In Persian].
Boritz, E., Kochetova-Kozloski, N., Robinson, L. (2011). Are fraud specialists effective at modifying audit programs in the presence of fraud risk? Working Paper, University of Waterloo.
Bowen, R.M., Call, A.C., Rajgopal, S. (2010). Whistle-blowing: target firm characteristics and economic consequences. The Accounting Review, 85(4), 1239-1271.
Cohen, J., Ding, Y., Lesage, C., Stolowy, H. (2011). Corporate fraud and managers’ behavior: Evidence from the press. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 271-315.
Davidson, R., Dey, A., Smith, A. (2015). Executives’ 'off-the-job' behavior, corporate culture, and financial reporting risk. Journal of Financial Economics, 117(1), 5-28.
Dorminey, J.W., Fleming, A.S., Kranacher, M., Riley, R.A. (2012). The evolution of fraud theory. Issues in Accounting Education, 27(2), 555-579.
Etemadi, H., Abdoli, L. (2018). Audit quality and financial statement fraud. Journal of Financial Accounting Knowledge, 4(4), 23-43 [In Persian].
Favere-Marchesi, M. (2013). Effects of decomposition and categorization on fraud-risk assessments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(4), 201-219.
Foroghi, D., Khaleghi, M., Rassaiian, A. (2012). The concept of materiality in financial statement auditing and its effect on auditor, s attention in manager’s fraud detecting process, Journal of Accounting Advances, 4(1), 111-135 [In Persian].
Fortvingler, J., Szívós, L. (2016). Different approaches to fraud risk assessment and their implications on audit planning. Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences, 24(2), 102-112.
Hamedian, H., Vahidi Elizi, E. (2009). Iranian auditors' perceptions of the effectiveness of risk signals in detecting fraudulent financial reporting. Journal of Accounting Research, 3, 162-197 [In Persian].
Hamilton, E.L. (2016). Evaluating the intentionality of identified misstatements: how perspective can help auditors in distinguishing errors from fraud. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 35(4), 57-78.
Hammersley, J.S. (2011). A review and model of auditor judgments in fraud-related planning tasks. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(4), 101-128.
Hammersley, J.S., Johnstone, K.M., Kadous, K. (2011). How do audit seniors respond to heightened fraud risk? Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 30(3), 81-101.
Hammersley, J.S., Bamber, E.M., Carpenter, T.D. (2010). The influence of documentation specificity and fraud risk priming on auditor fraud judgments and evidence evaluation decisions. The Accounting Review, 85(2), 547-571.
Hoffman, V.B., Zimbelman, M.F. (2009). Do strategic reasoning and brainstorming help auditors change their standard audit procedures in response to fraud risk? The Accounting Review, 84(3), 811-837.
Hogan, C.E., Rezaee, Z., Riley, R.A., Velury, U.K. (2008). Financial statement fraud: Insights from the academic literature. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 27(2), 231-252.
International Standard on Auditing 240 (ISA 240). (2009). The auditor’s responsibilities relating to fraud in an audit of financial statements.
Massihabadi, A., Sarchami, M. (2018). fuzzy approaches ability and their performance comparison to fraud detection in financial reporting. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 8(4), 161-190 [In Persian].
Mahdavi, G., Ghahramani, A. (2017). Model of fraud detection by Auditors by artificial neural networks. Journal of Audit Science, 17(67), 45-70 [In Persian].
Mock, T.J., Srivastava, R.P., Wright, A. (2017). Fraud risk assessment using the fraud risk model as a decision aid. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 14(1), 1-32.
Pourheydari, O., Bazrafshan, S. (2012). Importance of the fraud risk substrates in view of independent auditors. Journal of Financial Accounting and Auditing, 3(10), 1-25 [In Persian].
Pourheydari, O., Bazrafshan, S. (2012). An examination of the usefulness of fraud detection decision aid in assessment of management fraud risk. Journal of Empirical Research in Accounting, 1(3), 69-86 [In Persian].
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) (2007). Observations on auditors’ implementation of PCAOB standards relating to auditors’ responsibilities with respect to fraud, http://pcaob.org/inspections/ other/01-22_release_2007-001.pdf.
Safarzadeh, M.H. (2010). the ability of financial ratios in detecting fraudulent financial reporting: Logit analysis. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 1(1), 137-163 [In Persian].
Shelton, S.W., Whittington, O.R., Landsittel, D. (2001). Auditing firms' fraud risk assessment practices. Accounting Horizons, 15(1), 19-33.
Srivastava, R.P., Mock, T.J., Gao, L. (2011). The dempster-shafter theory: an introduction and fraud risk assessment illustration. Australian Accounting Review, 21(3), 282-291.
Tashdidi, E., Sepasi, S., Etemadi, H., Azar, A. (2019). new approach to predicting and detecting financial statement fraud, using the bee colony. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 10(3), 139-167 [In Persian].
Trompeter, G.M., Carpenter, T.D., Desai, N., Jones, K.L., Riley, R.A. (2013). A synthesis of fraud related research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(1), 287-321.
Rahrovi Dastjerdi, A., Foroghi, D., Kiani, G. (2018). assessing managers fraud through analysis of board of directors report by data mining. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 9(1), 91-114 [In Persian].
Van De Bunt, H. (2010). Walls of secrecy and silence: The madoff case and cartels in the construction industry. Criminology & Public Policy, 9(3), 435-453.
Wilks, T.J., Zimbelman, M.F. (2004). Decomposition of fraud-risk assessments and auditors’ sensitivity to fraud cues. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(3), 719-745.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 16 June 2020
  • Revise Date: 18 July 2020
  • Accept Date: 02 August 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics