Assessing going concern

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to ascertain the practical efficacy of statistical corporate failure models in improving auditors' going concern assessment. It also aims to examine auditors' perceptions of corporate failure models as an analytical procedure in this context. Design/methodology/approach The paper utilises a survey questionnaire with a case study component to evaluate the practical value of corporate failure models for assessing going concern, and to examine auditors' perceptions of such models as an analytical procedure for assessing going concern. Findings The results indicate that corporate failure models facilitate the formation of more appropriate going concern opinions and increase judgment consensus. Auditors perceive such models as useful in obtaining relevant evidential matter and in mitigating some of the subjectivity involved in assessing going concern. However, the results also indicate that corporate failure models are perceived to be more effective in the planning stages than at the final stages of the audit. Furthermore, auditors are seeking more explicit guidance in auditing standards on the use of corporate failure models for assessing going concern. Originality/value The study extends previous research by examining the practical efficacy of corporate failure models for assisting auditors to assess going concern in light of human information processing limitations. Further, it examines auditors' perceptions of corporate failure models as an analytical procedure, and the guidance that auditors seek on the use of such models in auditing standards.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.