01
原文：Hope O-K, Wang C, Wu Y, et al. Does convergence with international standards on auditing improve audit quality? [J]. The Accounting Review, 2024: 1-30.
Does Convergence with International Standards on Auditing Improve Audit Quality?
ABSTRACT: Many countries have converged their domestic auditing standards with International Standards on Auditing (ISA). This study provides global empirical evidence on first-order determinants of audit quality by examining whether and how convergence affects audit quality through utilizing data on 41 jurisdictions and using a staggered difference-in-differences approach. We find that ISA convergence leads to higher audit quality on average. The positive effect is stronger for clients of domestic audit firms, in jurisdictions with stronger enforcement, and when the ISA convergence level is higher. Insights from textual features suggest that changes in principle-orientation, comparability, readability, and size (or length) of auditing standards are positively related to audit quality. Exploratory analyses of textual content using machine learning reveal that the emphases of ISA on going-concern assessment and legal compliance, fraud risk assessment and internal control evaluation, and related-party transactions and subsequent events contribute to enhanced audit quality.
与国际审计准则的趋同会提升审计质量吗？
摘要：许多国家已将其国内审计准则与《国际审计准则》（ISA）趋同。本研究利用 41 个司法管辖区的数据，采用交错差分法，考察了趋同是否以及如何影响审计质量，为审计质量的一阶决定因素提供了全球经验证据。本文发现，《国际审计准则》趋同平均会提高审计质量。对于国内审计事务所的客户、执法力度较强的司法管辖区以及《国际审计准则》趋同水平较高的司法管辖区，这种积极影响更为明显。从文本特征中获得的启示表明，审计准则的原则导向、可比性、可读性和规模（或长度）的变化与审计质量正相关。利用机器学习对文本内容进行的探索性分析表明，《国际审计准则》对持续经营评估和法律合规性、欺诈风险评估和内部控制评价以及关联方交易和后续事件的重视有助于提高审计质量。
亮点：（1）本研究利用41个国家在2001年至2018年间将国内审计准则与国际审计准则趋同作为外生冲击，首次提供了国际审计准则趋同对审计质量影响的实证证据；（2）本文也为国际审计准则趋同影响审计质量的机理提供了新见解。
02
原文：Aobdia D, Liu X, Na K, et al. Client restatement announcement, audit office human capital investment, and audit quality improvements [J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2024: 101741.
Client Restatement Announcement, Audit Office Human Capital Investment, and Audit Quality Improvements
ABSTRACT: This paper examines audit offices’ human capital investment in response to client restatement announcements and the resulting effects on audit quality and audit office client base. We find that audit offices attempt to acquire human capital and talent by posting more audit-related job positions just after a client announces a restatement. The increase in job postings follows restatements with more negative announcement returns and restatements of annual financial statements, and is concentrated among more senior and experienced positions. Importantly, the increased job postings are not driven by replacement hiring due to individual auditor departures and reflect more auditors joining the office. These human capital investments reduce future client misstatements and losses in client portfolios, indicating improvements in actual and perceived audit quality. Audit offices are also more likely to replace audit managing partners and prevent the signing partners of the misstated financial statements from signing new audit reports after restatement announcements.
客户重述公告、审计处人力资本投资和审计质量改进
摘要：本文研究了审计师事务所为应对客户重述公告而进行的人力资本投资，以及由此对审计质量和审计师事务所客户群产生的影响。本文发现，在客户宣布重述后，审计师事务所会通过发布更多与审计相关的职位来获取人力资本和人才。职位发布的增加紧随负面公告回报较多的重述和年度财务报表的重述，并且集中在更高级和更有经验的职位上。重要的是，职位发布的增加并不是由于个别审计师离职导致的替代性招聘，而是反映了有更多的审计师加入了办事处。这些人力资本投资减少了未来的客户错报和客户投资组合的损失，表明实际和感知的审计质量有所提高。审计处也更有可能更换审计管理合伙人，并防止错报财务报表的签字合伙人在重报公告发布后签署新的审计报告。
亮点：（1）本文加深了对美国审计师如何应对公开审计失败的理解，即审计师事务所通过人力资本投资应对公开的低质量审计。具体来说，审计机构通过雇佣更多的审计人员来补救低质量审计，而这些尝试有助于提高审计质量；（2）本文为审计过程中审计师个人的文献做出了贡献。本文以客户重述公告为背景，在这些研究的基础上，建立了人才和经验丰富的人员与提高审计质量之间更直接的联系；（3）本文还补充了有关审计师提供高质量审计的激励机制的文献。本文通过利用客户重述公告对审计师激励的增加，并通过证明审计师事务所为应对重述而增加人力资本投资，以及这种投资能够提高审计质量，对这些研究进行了补充。
03
原文：Cahan S F, Che L, Knechel W R, et al. Do audit teams affect audit production and quality? evidence from audit teams' industry knowledge [J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 2022, 39(4): 2657-2695.
Do Audit Teams Affect Audit Production and Quality? Evidence from Audit Teams' Industry Knowledge
ABSTRACT: We examine how the extent and distribution of industry knowledge within an audit team affect audit outcomes. While prior research examining the role of auditors’ industry knowledge focuses mainly on audit firms, audit offices, and audit partners, audits are conducted by audit teams. Using an audit framework and proprietary data from a Big 4 firm that includes audit hours for each team member, we find that Big 4 audit teams with higher average industry knowledge are associated with more audit effort. In contrast, we find mixed evidence on the relation between the average hourly internal cost rate and team knowledge. Furthermore, we find that balanced teams, which have at least one team member who qualifies as an industry specialist at both the senior rank and junior rank, produce higher-quality audits than teams that have no specialists. In contrast, the audit quality of unbalanced teams, which have a specialist at the senior rank but not the junior rank or vice versa, is not statistically different than teams with no specialists. Overall, our evidence suggests that both the extent and distribution of industry knowledge within a team matter for audit production and that industry knowledge is utilized more effectively when it is spread throughout the team. The findings have useful implications for audit firms and regulators regarding how team composition and industry knowledge affect audit outcomes.
审计团队影响审计成果和质量吗？来自审计团队行业知识的证据
摘要：本文研究了行业知识在审计团队中的程度和分布如何影响审计结果。之前研究审计师行业知识的作用时，主要关注的是审计公司、审计机构和审计合伙人，而审计是由审计团队进行的。通过使用审计框架和四大公司的专有数据（包括每个团队成员的审计时长），本文发现，平均行业知识水平较高的四大公司审计团队的审计工作量更大。相比之下，本文发现平均每小时内部成本率与团队知识之间的关系好坏参半。此外，本文还发现，与没有专家的团队相比，平衡型团队（团队中至少有一名成员同时具备高级和初级行业专家资格）的审计质量更高。相比之下，不平衡团队的审计质量与没有专家的团队没有统计学差异，不平衡团队是指高级团队中有一名专家，但初级团队中没有，反之亦然。总体而言，本文的证据表明，团队中行业知识的程度和分布对审计工作的产生都有影响，而且当行业知识在整个团队中分布广泛时，对行业知识的利用会更有效。这些发现对于审计公司和监管机构了解团队组成和行业知识如何影响审计结果具有有益的启示。
亮点：（1）本文通过研究行业知识在四大审计团队中的作用为使用专有数据研究审计团队动态的这支文献做出了贡献；（2）本文通过考察团队层面的劳动力投入质量，并将行业知识视为这一质量的重要决定因素，扩展了审计生产的文献；（3）本文从审计生产的角度出发，研究了劳动投入如何随着团队行业知识的增加而变化，为收取专家溢价费用提供了依据。
本文仅用于学术交流
原文版权归原作者和原发刊所有
转载请注明出处
总编：游家兴
解析：宋伍琦
审校：刘乾 秦会
编辑：潘芳妍
