en pl
en pl

Central European Management Journal

Show issue
Year 2019 
Volume 27 
Issue 3

Institutionalizing Corporate Governance Reforms in Poland: External Auditors’ Perspective

Dorota Dobija
Kozminski University

2019 27 (3) Central European Management Journal

DOI 10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.2

Article contents

Abstract

Purpose: The paper examines auditors’ experiences with corporate governance (CG) in general and
audit committees (ACs) in particular in the setting of a Polish two-tier board system and a capital
market characterized by high ownership concentration, which therefore extends the research on
CG practices of an economy beyond the well-researched Anglo-American model.

Methodology: This study adopts a qualitative research approach by using interview data from
fifteen interviews with auditors working with large publicly-listed companies in Poland to examine
the relationships among auditors, Audit Committees, and CG.

Findings: The auditors indicate that the CG environment has changed. However, the institutionalization
of an AC in Poland generally is the subject of coercive isomorphic pressures, which lead
to its decoupling and transition toward a ritualistic role. Moreover, auditors report only some
reliance on CG information in the planning phase and none in the field-testing or review phases.

Originality: The findings differ from those of prior studies conducted predominantly in the USA
and the UK, in which auditors reported far greater reliance on CG in all phases of the audit process.
The two possible reasons for this difference in findings could be the different development stages
between capital markets and different CG systems.

References

  1. Adamska, A., Bohdanowicz, L. and Gad, J. (2017). Reakcje spółek publicznych na wprowadzenie obowiązku powoływania komitetu audytu. E-mentor, 4, 25–35. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahrens, T. and Dent, J. (1998). Accounting and organisations: Realising the richness of field study research. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10(1), 1–39. [Google Scholar]
  3. Al‐Shaer, H., Salama, A. and Toms, S. (2017). Audit committees and financial reporting quality: Evidence from UK environmental accounting disclosures. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 18(1), 2–21, https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR‐10‐2014‐0114 [Google Scholar]
  4. Al‐Shaer, H. and Zaman, M. (2016). Board gender diversity and sustainability reporting quality. Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, 12(3), 210–222, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Al-Shaer, H. and Zaman, M. (2018). Credibility of sustainability reports: The contribution of audit committees. Business strategy and the environment, 27(7), 973–986, https:// doi.org/10.1002/bse.2046 [Google Scholar]
  6. Aluchna, M. (2007). Mechanizmy Corporate Governance w Spółkach Giełdowych [Corporate governance mechanisms in listed companies]. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH. [Google Scholar]
  7. Aluchna, M. and Koładkiewicz, I. (2010). Polish Corporate Governance – The case of small and medium sized companies. International Journal of Banking, Finance and Accounting, 2(3), 218–235, https://doi.org/10.1504/ijbaaf.2010.033498 [Google Scholar]
  8. Beasley, M., Carcello, J., Hermanson, D. and Neal, T.L. (2009). The AC oversight process. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(1), 65–122. [Google Scholar]
  9. Beattie, V., Fearnley, S. and Hines, T. (2011). Reaching key financial reporting decisions: How directors and auditors interact. Chichester: John Wiley Sons. [Google Scholar]
  10. Beattie, V., Fearnley, S. and Hines, T. (2014). Boundary spanning and gatekeeping roles of UK audit committees. Accounting and Business Research, 44(3), 315–343, https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2014.898434 [Google Scholar]
  11. Beattie, V., Fearnley, S. and Hines, T. (2015). Auditor-client interactions in the changed UK regulatory environment – a revised grounded theory model. International Journal of Auditing, 19, 15–36, https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2014.898434 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bedard, J. and Compernolle T. (2014). The external auditor and the audit committee. In: D. Hay, W.R. Knechel and M. Willekens (eds.), The Rouledge Companion to Auditing. Abingdon: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bedard, J. and Gendron, Y. (2010). Strengthening the financial reporting system: Can ACs deliver? International Journal of Auditing, 14, 174–210, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-1123.2009.00413.x [Google Scholar]
  14. Böhm, Bollen, L.H. and Hassink, H.F. (2013). Spotlight on the Design of European ACs: A Comparative Descriptive Study. International Journal of Auditing, 17, 138–161, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-1123.2012.00461.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Braiotta, J. and Zhou, J. (2008). An exploratory study of the effect of the European Union 8th Directive on company law on Audit Committees: Evidence from EU companies listed on US stock exchanges. Advances in Accounting, 24(2), 262–272, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2008.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  16. Brennan, N. and Kirwan, C.E. (2015). Audit committees: Practices, practitioners and praxis of governance. Accounting, Auditing Accountability Journal, 28(4), 466–493, https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2015-1925 [Google Scholar]
  17. Carcello, J.V., Hermanson, D.R. and Ye, S. (2011). Corporate Governance research in accounting and auditing: Insights, practice implications, and future research directions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 30(3), 1–31, https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-10112 [Google Scholar]
  18. Cohen, J.R., Hayes, C., Krishnamoorthy, G., Monroe, G.S., Wright, A.M. (2013). The effectiveness ofSOX regulation: An interview study of corporate directors. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 25(1), 61–87, https://doi.org/10.2308/bria-50245 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cohen, J.R., Krishnamoorthy, G. and Wright, A. (2008). Form vs. Substance: The Implications for Auditing Practice and Research of Alternative Perspectives on Corporate Governance. Auditing: A Journal of Practice Theory, 27(2), 1–33, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1010201 [Google Scholar]
  20. Cohen, J.R., Krishnamoorthy G. and Wright, A.M. (2004). The Corporate Governance mosaic and financial reporting quality. Journal of Accounting Literature, 23, 87–152. [Google Scholar]
  21. Cohen, J.R., Krishnamoorthy G. and Wright, A.M. (2007). The impact of roles of the board on auditors’ risk assessments and program planning decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice Theory, 26(1), 91–112, https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2007.26.1.91 [Google Scholar]
  22. Cohen, J.R., Krishnamoorthy G. and Wright, A.M. (2010). Corporate Governance in the post Sarbanes-Oxley era: Auditor experiences. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27(3), 751–786, doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01026.x [Google Scholar]
  23. Cohen, J.R., Krishnamoorthy, G. and Wright, A.M. (2002). Corporate Governance and the audit process. Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(4), 573–594. [Google Scholar]
  24. Cohen, J.R. and Simnett, R. (2015). CSR and assurance services: A research agenda. Auditing: a Journal of Practice and Theory, 34(1), 59–74, https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt‐50876 [Google Scholar]
  25. Collier, P. and Zaman, M. (2005). Convergence in European corporate governance: The audit committee concept. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(6), 753–768, https://doi.org/j.1467-8683.2005.00468.x [Google Scholar]
  26. Compernolle, T. (2009). La construction collective de l’indépendance du commissaire aux comptes: la place du comité d’audit [The collective construction of external auditor independence: The role of the audit committee]. Comptabilité Contrôle Audit, 15(3), 91–116. [Google Scholar]
  27. Compernolle, T. and Richard, C. (2018). The Audit Committee as an Interactive Process: Insights on the AC Chairperson’s Power, European Accounting Review, 27(4), 623–647, https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2017.1367315 [Google Scholar]
  28. Fiolleau, K., Hoang, K., Jamal, K. and Sunder, S. (2013). How do regulatory reforms to enhance auditor independence work in practice? Contemporary Accounting Research, 30(3), 864–890, https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12004 [Google Scholar]
  29. DeZoort, F.T., Hermanson, D.R., Archambeault, D.S. and Reed S.A. (2002). Audit Committee effectiveness: A synthesis of the empirical Audit Committee literature. Journal of Accounting Literature, 21(1), 38–75. [Google Scholar]
  30. DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983). The iron case revisited. Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160, doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08184-3_17 [Google Scholar]
  31. Dobija, D. (2015). Exploring Audit Committee practices: Oversight of financial reporting and external auditors in Poland. Journal of Management and Governance, 19(1), 113–143, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-013-9281-6 [Google Scholar]
  32. Dobija, D. and Klimczak, K. (2010). Development of accounting in Poland: Market efficiency and the value relevance of reported earnings. International Journal of Accounting, 45(3), 356–374, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intacc.2010.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  33. Dobija, D., Koładkiewicz, I., Klimczak, K. and Cieślak, I. (2011). Komitety rad nadzorczych [Supervisory Board’s Committees]. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer Polska. [Google Scholar]
  34. Dobija, D. and Kravchenko, G. (2017). Supervisory board composition and firm financial performance: a case of companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange, Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, 25(4), 75–95. [Google Scholar]
  35. Dobija, D. and Puławska, K. (2019). Linking diversity on audit committees and financial reporting quality in Poland, European Journal International Management (in print). [Google Scholar]
  36. Fiolleau, K., Hoang, K., Jamal, K. and Sunder, S. (2013). How do regulatory reforms to enhance auditor independence work in practice? Contemporary Accounting Research, 30(3), 864–890, https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12004 [Google Scholar]
  37. Gendron, Y. (2009). Discussion of “the Audit Committee oversight process”: Advocating openness in accounting research. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(2), 123–34, https://doi.org/10.1506/car.26.1.4 [Google Scholar]
  38. Gendron, Y. and Bédard, J. (2006), On the constitution of AC effectiveness. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(2), 211–239 [Google Scholar]
  39. Gendron, Y., Bedard, J., Gosselin, M. (2004). Getting inside the black box: A field study of practices in ‘effective’ audit committees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice Theory, 23(1), 153–171. [Google Scholar]
  40. Gramling, A.A., Rittenberg, L.E. and Johnstone, K.M. (2012). Auditing. South-Western Cengage Learning, 8th edition, Andover, United Kingdom. [Google Scholar]
  41. Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K. and Suddaby, R. (Eds.) (2008), Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, Sage, London. [Google Scholar]
  42. Grey, I. and Manson, S. (2011). The Audit Process. Principles, Practice and Cases. South-Western Cengage Learning, 5th edition, Andover, United Kingdom. [Google Scholar]
  43. Hassan, Y., and Hijazi, R. (2015). “Determinants of the voluntary formation of a company audit committee: evidence from Palestine”. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 11(1), 27–46. [Google Scholar]
  44. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2016). The Audit Market in Poland. Key Statistics and Market Perceptions. Center for Financial Reporting Reform, World Bank Gorup, Vienna, Austria. [Google Scholar]
  45. Jaruga, A. (1993). Changing rules of accounting in Poland. European Accounting Review, 2(1), 115–126, https://doi.org/10.1080/09638189300000010 [Google Scholar]
  46. Journal of Laws (2009). The Act of 7 May 2009 on Certified Auditors, Their Self-Government, Entities Authorized to Audit Financial Statements and Public Supervision. [Google Scholar]
  47. Journal of Laws (2017). The Act of 11 May 2017 on Certified Auditors, Audit Firms and Public Supervision. [Google Scholar]
  48. Koładkiewicz, I. (2011). Przewodniczący rady dyrektorów/rady nadzorczej – Europejskie dobrepraktyki nadzoru korporacyjnego a polska praktyka działania. Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, 5(167), 65–82. [Google Scholar]
  49. Kosmala MacLullich, K. and Sucher, P. (2004). A comparative analysis of auditor independence in economics in transition. Edinburgh: Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland. [Google Scholar]
  50. MacLean, T.L. and Behnam, M. (2010). The Dangers of Decoupling: The Relationship between Compliance Programs, Legitimacy Perceptions, and Institutionalized Misconduct, Academy of Management, 53(6), 1499–1520, https://doi.org//10.5465/amj.2010.57319198 [Google Scholar]
  51. Official Journal of the European Union (2006) Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on Statutory Audits of Annual Accounts and Consolidated AccountsAmending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and Repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC. Available online at: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/43/2014-06-16 [Google Scholar]
  52. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  53. Salleh, Z. and Stewart, J. (2012). The role of the audit committee in resolving auditor-client disagreements: A Malaysian study. Accounting, Auditing Accountability Journal, 25(8), 1340–1372, https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571211275506 [Google Scholar]
  54. Sarens, G., Christopher, J. and Zaman, M. (2013). A study of the informal interactions between audit committees and internal auditors in Australia. Australian Accounting Review, 23(4), 307–329, https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12024 [Google Scholar]
  55. Schroeder, M. (2007). Expanding statutory auditor commentary: The role of long form audit reports in Corporate Governance: Evidence from the Polish audit profession. Full Research Report, ESRC End of Award Report, RES-000-22-1782. Swindon: ESRC. [Google Scholar]
  56. Scott, W.R. (2008). Institutions and Organisations: Ideas and Interests. Thousand Oaks, California”, SAGE Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  57. Silverman, D. (1985). Qualitative methodology and sociology: Describing the social world. Aldershot, UK: Glower. [Google Scholar]
  58. Słomka-Gołębiowska, A. and Urbanek, P. (2016). Corporate boards, large blockholders and executive compensation in banks: evidence from Poland. Emerging Markets Review, 28, 203–220. [Google Scholar]
  59. Spira, L.F. (1999). Ceremonies of Governance: Perspectives on the Role of the AC. Journal of Management and Governance, 3(3), 231–260. [Google Scholar]
  60. Spira, L.F. (2002). The audit committee: Performing corporate governance. Boston: Kluwer Academic. [Google Scholar]
  61. Staszkiewicz, P. (2017). Quo Vadis, Auditor ? Synteza Badań Nad Rewizją Finansową W Polskiej Domenie Publicznej. Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowosci, 95(151), 81–96, https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0010.6568 [Google Scholar]
  62. The Act as of 7 May 2009 on Statutory Auditors, Their Self-Governance, Entities Authorised to Audit Financial Statements and on Public Oversight, Dz. U., No. 77. Item 649 (2009) [Google Scholar]
  63. Turley, S. and Zaman, M. (2004). The Corporate Governance effects of Audit Committees. Journal of Management and Governance, 8(3), 305–332. [Google Scholar]
  64. Tuttle, B. and Dillard, J. (2007). Beyond competition: Institutional isomorphism in US accounting research. Accounting Horizons, 21(4), 387–410. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2007.21.4.387 [Google Scholar]
  65. Weimer, J. and Pape, J. (1999), A taxonomy of systems of corporate governance, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 7(2), 152–166, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8683.00143 [Google Scholar]
  66. Zaman G. M., and Valentinčič, A. (2011), “Determinants of voluntary audit committee formation in a two-tier board system of a post-transitional economy – the case of Slovenia”, Accounting in Europe, 8(2), 235–256. [Google Scholar]

Full metadata record

Cite this record

APA style

Dobija, Dorota (2019). Dobija, D. . (2019). Institutionalizing Corporate Governance Reforms in Poland: External Auditors’ Perspective. Central European Management Journal, 27(3), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.2 (Original work published 2019)

MLA style

Dobija, Dorota. Dobija, D. . “Institutionalizing Corporate Governance Reforms In Poland: External Auditors’ Perspective”. 2019. Central European Management Journal, vol. 27, no. 3, 2019, pp. 28-54.

Chicago style

Dobija, Dorota. Dobija, Dorota . “Institutionalizing Corporate Governance Reforms In Poland: External Auditors’ Perspective”. Central European Management Journal, Central European Management Journal, 27, no. 3 (2019): 28-54. doi:10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.2.

Copyright info

copyright info

CC-BY-NC-ND

People also read: