Factors determining big four auditors’ intentions to use blockchain technology: a mixed-methods approach

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to identify the factors affecting auditors’ intention to use blockchain within the Big Four firms. The research proposes an extended technology acceptance model by integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) with innovation diffusion theory (IDT). Design/methodology/approach Using a mixed-method approach, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 30 external auditors from the Big Four. The insights from these interviews were then used to construct a survey administered to 130 auditors to explore the subject matter comprehensively. Findings The results indicate that auditors’ intention to use blockchain is significantly influenced by perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU). The study highlights relative advantage and trialability as the most important attributes of IDT affecting auditors’PU and ease of use of blockchain. Observability has a significant positive relationship with PEOU but a significant negative correlation with PU. However, complexity is statistically insignificant in explaining PEOU. Finally, access to big data significantly enhances auditors’ perception of the usefulness of blockchain technology. Research limitations/implications This study highlights the practical implications of adopting blockchain in the audits of Big Four firms in Europe while emphasizing the need for training programs, collaboration between auditors and other departments, the development of regulatory frameworks to improve efficiency and the organization of awareness and educational campaigns. Originality/value The findings provide valuable empirical evidence on auditors’ attitudes toward blockchain, develop a framework outlining the key factors influencing its adoption, and offer guidance for regulators to better understand the barriers auditors face in integrating blockchain into their practices.

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 — 4 citations exist upstream.

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