Allameh Tabataba'i University

 News

Eskandari, M., Ahadi Serkani, S., Hosseine, S. (2024). Presenting a Pathological Framework of Teamwork in Auditing: Matrix Ranking Process. , 21(82), 257-306. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2024.79834.2570
Mehdi Eskandari; Seyed Yousef Ahadi Serkani; Seyede Atefe Hosseine. "Presenting a Pathological Framework of Teamwork in Auditing: Matrix Ranking Process". , 21, 82, 2024, 257-306. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2024.79834.2570
Eskandari, M., Ahadi Serkani, S., Hosseine, S. (2024). 'Presenting a Pathological Framework of Teamwork in Auditing: Matrix Ranking Process', , 21(82), pp. 257-306. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2024.79834.2570
Eskandari, M., Ahadi Serkani, S., Hosseine, S. Presenting a Pathological Framework of Teamwork in Auditing: Matrix Ranking Process. , 2024; 21(82): 257-306. doi: 10.22054/qjma.2024.79834.2570

Presenting a Pathological Framework of Teamwork in Auditing: Matrix Ranking Process

مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی
Article 7, Volume 21, Issue 82, September 2024, Pages 257-306    PDF (2.02 M)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.22054/qjma.2024.79834.2570
Authors
Mehdi Eskandari1; Seyed Yousef Ahadi Serkani* 2; Seyede Atefe Hosseine3
1PhD student, Department of Accounting, Firoozkooh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Firoozkooh, Iran
2Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, Firoozkooh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Firoozkooh, Iran
3Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Firoozkooh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Firoozkooh, Iran
Abstract
The purpose of this research is presenting a pathological framework of teamwork in auditing by matrix ranking process.
The aim of this study is to present a pathological framework of teamwork in auditing using a matrix ranking process. This study employs a mixed-methods and exploratory approach due to the lack of identification of vulnerable areas of teamism in the auditing profession. The grounded theory method was applied to determine the dimensions of the model through fuzzy Delphi analysis. There is a content similarity between the components representing the central field of damage of teamism in the auditing profession and the identified categories. Using the interpretive ranking process, an attempt was made to prioritize the identified axes. The results of this study, based on 12 interviews in the qualitative phase and the model presentation, indicate the existence of 3 categories, 8 components, and 42 conceptual themes. In the second phase of the research, it was also determined that individual perception disorder is the most significant issue that the audit teams face in the process of sharing information and focusing on collaborative methods. This issue can seriously challenge the performance of audit teams.

Introduction

In organizational structures, one of the most important processes for fostering participation and information sharing is developing team orientation to achieve effectiveness. In other words, participation and the creation of synergy are considered key outcomes of team orientation, through which any organization can improve competitive results. However, it is important to note that some professions benefit more from team orientation because the specific characteristics of certain jobs, particularly those involving the sharing of knowledge and experience, can yield greater advantages. Auditing is one of such profession that relies on team orientation due to the specialized knowledge and experience required. Auditing teams are structured according to certain norms designed to improve knowledge sharing and learning.

Literature Review

At the onset of interpersonal communication, the concept of a group was viewed as a collaborative function. This was believed to yield more long-term results compared to individual decision-making, as joint efforts between individuals were thought to provide better solutions to the organization’s challenges. However, with the development of behavioral research in the functional fields of the group, it became evident that, like previous theories, the group offered only proportional efficiency for the organization and did not significantly differ from individual decision-making in terms of effectiveness. In fact, issues within the group, such as power dynamics, fear, and frustration among members, particularly among minority stakeholders, often cause more disruptions in solving organizational problems and could impose significant costs on the organization.

Methodology

The research approach of the present study, in terms of data collection logic, is hybrid in nature. This is because it examines a phenomenon for which no comprehensive framework exists in the theoretical literature of the auditing profession, nor is there a consensus. Therefore, the study begins by analyzing the qualitative data and relying on the data theory method of the foundation, aiming to identify the dimensions of the damages of the audit teams through a multidimensional model. For this purpose, Glaser's (1992) emergent approach is employed to formulate the audit teams' vulnerability framework, utilizing expert interviews conducted in three stages of coding.

Result

Based on the arguments presented in the methodology regarding the lack of a theoretical framework for team orientation vulnerability in the auditing profession, the foundation data theory analysis process, following Glazer's approach, was used as the basis for the qualitative section. In this analysis, a total of 315 open codes were generated from interviews with 12 identified accounting experts. Through a three-stage coding process, 8 components and 4 main categories were identified. To ensure the reliability of the identified dimensions, Fuzzy Delphi analysis was employed. The findings from this analysis confirm all the core areas of the damage of team orientation within the audit profession. Subsequently, to address the research question of determining the most significant central field of damage of team orientation within the auditing profession, the interpretive ranking process was utilized.

Discussion

In analyzing the obtained results, it can be stated that auditors, as members of the audit team, can effectively contribute to improving audit quality when each auditor can individually play a meaningful role in collaboration, due to their level of perceptual knowledge, which stems from behavioral and psychological characteristics, and their ability to share information.

Conclusion

The results indicate that auditors, as members of the audit team, can effectively contribute to improving audit quality when each auditor can individually play an active role in collaboration, due to their level of perceptual knowledge, which stems from behavioral and psychological characteristics.
 
Keywords
Team Orientation; Cognitive Disorder; Pathology
References
  1. Agbejule, A., Rapo, J., & Saarikoski, L. (2021). Vertical and horizontal trust and team learning: the role of organizational climate. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 14(7), 1425-1443. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-05-2020-0155
  2. Annelin, A. (2023). Audit team equality and audit quality threatening behaviour. Managerial Auditing Journal, 38(2), 158-185. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-08-2021-3288
  3. Aschauer, E., & Quick, R. (2024). Implementing shared service centres in Big 4 audit firms: an exploratory study guided by institutional theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 37(9), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-07-2021-5376
  4. Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2008). Effects of training on idea generation in groups. Small Group Research, 39(2), 523–541.
  5. Beasley, M. S., & Jenkins, J. G. (2003) A primer for brainstorming fraud risks. Journal of Accountancy, 196(4), 32–38.
  6. Brazel, J. F., Carpenter, T. D., & Jenkins, J. G. (2010) Auditors’ use of brainstorming in the consideration of fraud: Reports from the field. Accounting Review, 85(1), 1273–1301.
  7. Cahan, S. F., Che, L., Knechel, W. R., & Svanström, T. (2022). Do Audit Teams Affect Audit Production and Quality? Evidence from Audit Teams' Industry Knowledge. Contemporary Accounting Research, 39(4), 2657-2695. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12807
  8. Chen, C. X., Trotman, K.T., & Zhou, F. (2015b). Nominal versus Interacting Electronic Fraud Brainstorming in Hierarchical Audit Teams. The Accounting Review, 90(1), 175-198.
  9. Chen, W., Khalifa, A. S., Morgan, K. L., & Trotman, K. T. (2018). The effect of brainstorming guidelines on individual auditors’ identification of potential frauds. Australian Journal of Management, 43(2), 225-240.
  10. Daugherty, B. E., Dickins, D., & Fennema, M. G. (2014). Offshoring Audit Tasks and Jurors' Evaluations of Damage Awards against Auditors. Current Issues in Auditing, 8(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia-50786
  11. Gissel, J. L., & Johnstone, K. M. (2019). Information Sharing during Auditors' Fraud Brainstorming: Effects of Psychological Safety and Auditor Knowledge. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(2), 87–110. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-51519
  12. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.
  13. Henwood, K. L., & Pigeon, N. R. (1992). Qualitative research and psychological theorizing. British Journal of Psychology, 83(1), 97-112.
  14. Hess, J.P. (2018). Autonomous team members’ expectations for top-leader involvement, Team Performance Management, 24(5/6), 283-297. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-10-2017-0060
  15. Hoffman, V. B. & Zimbelman, M. F. (2009) Do strategic reasoning and brainstorming help auditors change their standard audit procedures in response to fraud risk? Accounting Review, 84(2), 811–837.
  16. Jiang, J., Xie, W., Wang, Sh., Zhang, Y., & Gao, J. (2023). Assessing team creativity with multi-attribute group decision-making in a knowledge building community: A design-based research. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 48(1), 55-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101304
  17. Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2008). A contextual reexamination of work team diversity research: Review and future agenda, Phillips, K.W. (Ed.) Diversity and Groups (Research on Managing Groups and Teams, Vol. 11), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 27-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1534-0856(08)11002-7
  18. Kuselias, S., Agoglia, Ch, P., & Wang, E. Y. (2023). The effect of team member proximity and assignment length on audit staff reliance on a supervisor's preferences, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 105(2), 517-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2022.101391
  19. Ma, J., Lu, Y., Gong, Y., & Li, R. (2024). Diversity in online self-organizing teams: longitudinal evidence from an open innovation community. Management Decision, 62(1), 219-239. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2022-1182
  20. Maan, P., & Srivastava, D.K. (2023). Factors affecting team performance: An empirical study of Indian GenY and GenZ cohorts. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 42(8), 986-1006. https://doi.org/10.1108/‌EDI-05-2022-0114
  21. Mnif, Y., & Cherif, I. (2022). Audit partner workload, gender and audit quality. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(5), 1047-1070. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-08-2021-0219
  22. Osborn, A. F. (1957). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking. 2nd ed. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
  23. Paulus, P. B., & Putman, N. T. (2006). Effects of task instructions and brief breaks on brainstorming, Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(3), 206-219.
  24. Porcuna-Enguix, L., Bustos-Contell, E., Serrano-Madrid, J., & Labatut-Serer, G. (2021). Constructing the Audit Risk Assessment by the Audit Team Leader When Planning: Using Fuzzy Theory, Mathematics, 9(23), 30-56. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9233065
  25. Savela, N., Kaakinen, M., Ellonen, N., & Oksanen, A. (2020). Sharing a work team with robots: The negative effect of robot co-workers on in-group identification with the work team, Computers in Human Behavior, 115(2), 109-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106585
  26. Sharma, Sh., Aparicio, E. (2022). Organizational and team culture as antecedents of protection motivation among IT employees, Computers & Security, 120(1), 87-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2022.‌102774
  27. Takeda, F. (2023). Employing string similarity metrics of partners to estimate audit team continuity: determinant and its effects on audit outcomes and pricing, Journal of Accounting Literature, 45(2), 314-339. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAL-02-2022-0026
  28. Trotman, K. T., Bauer, T. D., & Humphreys, K. A. (2015) Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 47(6), 56–72.
  29. Trotman, K. T., Simnett, R., & Khalifa, A. (2009). Impact of the type of audit team discussions on auditors’ generation of material frauds. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(3), 1115–1142.
  30. Waseem, M., Iqbal, S., & Khan, K. (2022). Impact of project governance on project success, with mediating role of organizational support and project team cohesion. Journal of Facilities Management, 22(3), 432-457. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-03-2022-0023
  31. Wetmiller, R. J. (2023). The copycat effect: do social influences allow peer team members' dysfunctional audit behaviors to spread throughout the audit team?, Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(2), 362-380. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-12-2020-0232
  32. Aghaie, A., & Ahmadi, N. (2016). The Effects of Interaction among Audit Firms Ethical Culture, Audit Team Norms and Auditors Personality Type on Auditors' Intention to Report Detected Errors. Empirical Research in Accounting, 6(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.22051/jera.‌2016.2162 [In Persian]
  33. Bakhteyari, M., Rezazadeh, J., & Biglar, K. (2024). Audit Engagement Quality Control Review Process. Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting, 20(80), 81-130. https://doi.org/10.22054/‌qjma.2024.‌76885.2518 [In Persian]
  34. Barazandeh, A., Samavatyan, H., Nouri, A., & Abedi, M. R. (2020). Effect of Training based on Quality of Work Life Improvement on Perceived Organizational Training Effectiveness among Employees of a Food Production Factory. New Educational Approaches, 15(1), 177-188. https://doi.org/10.22108/nea.2021.116007.1350 [In Persian]
  35. Boluo, G., Barzideh, F., & Alahyari Abhari, H. (2020). A Model for Assessment of the Risk of Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 11(4), 25-45. https://doi.org/‌10.22103/jak.2020.15880.3254 [In Persian]
  36. Danaeefard, H., Nayyeri, S., & Akhondi, M. (2020). The Effect of Organizational Goal Ambiguity on Employee Morale in Public Service Organizations in Terms of Organizational Mission and Individual Characteristics. Journal of Public Administration, 12(1), 24-44. https://doi.org/10.22059/jipa.2019.288554.2621 [In Persian]
  37. Ghorbaniyan, A., Abdoli, M., Valiyan, H., & Boudlaie, H. (2024). Expanding of Corporate Citizen Theory in Evaluating Internal Auditor Functions Green. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 15(1), 131-153. https://doi.org/10.22103/jak.2022.19900.3745 [In Persian]
  38. Kalamiyan Moghadam, H., Maharati, Y., Ashrafi, M., & Khorakiyan, A. (2020). Identifying factors affecting the recognition of opportunities to create social value in Iran: data base theorizing with an emergent approach (Glaisari), Social Sciences, 17(1), 87-141. https://doi.org/10.22067/SOCIAL.2021.29569 [In Persian]
  39. Khirandish, M., Khodayee, A., & Mohammdi, A. (2015). A Comprehensive Model of Key Factors of Teamwork Effectiveness and its Measuring Scales in Organizational Context. Organizational Behaviour Studies Quarterly, 4(3), 60-31. https://obs.sinaweb.net/article_‌15513.html?‌lang=en [In Persian]
  40. Mansoorabadi, A., Moradi, J., Salehi, E., & Amiri, H. (2024). Investigating the effect of philosophical mindset dimensions on the relationship between audit team norms and auditor objectivity. Accounting Knowledge and Management Audit, 13(50), 73-86. https://www.jmaak.ir/article_19865.html?lang=en [In Persian]
  41. Mousavi Shiri, S. M., Yazdani, M., & Mirzaee, M. (2020). Auditors’ Performance in Fraud Brainstorming Sessions: Nominal Group Technique and Interactive Groups. Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting, 17(68), 67-95. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjma.2021.17790.1514 [In Persian]
  42. Shafie Nategh, M. M., Rashidi, M. A., & Tohidi, M. (2023). Designing an Interpretive Structural Model for Identifying and Prioritizing Financial Strategic Risks in the Petrochemical Industry of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Asset Management and Financing, 11(1), 29-52. https://doi.org/10.22108/amf.2023.135670.1765 [In Persian]
  43. Taheri, H., Kiakojuri, D., Mokhtari, M., & Farrokh Seresht, B. (2023). Qualitatively Designing and Explaining of Effective Team Building in Active Multinational Organizations in Iran. Sociology of Education, 9(2), 231-242. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijes.2023.2009580.1455 [In Persian]
  44. Valian, H., & Hasanpour, D. (2021). Development of professional career of internal auditors according to organizational learning characteristics based on foundational data analysis and interactive qualitative analysis (IQA), Audit Science, 21(82), 262-297. http://danesh.dmk.ir/article-1-2082-fa.html [In Persian]
  45. Zamani, R., Lari Dashtbayaz, M., & Hesarzadeh, R. (2023). Transformational Leadership of Audit Managers and Supervisors on the Quality of Team Interactions of Independent Auditors. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 14(4), 31-51. https://doi.org/10.22103‌/jak.2023.20817.3830 [In Persian]
Statistics
Article View: 711
PDF Download: 497


login