Why are going concern opinions important? What do we know from previous research about going concern opinions? How do audit practitioners look at these findings? And: what are the practical take-aways? In this FARView podcast, Marshall Geiger (University of Richmond) digs into these questions. In particular, he zooms in on joined work with Anna Gold and Philip Wallage, which has been published in Accounting Horizons. You can also watch this podcast on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOxoPWrTfpU

Sustainability assurance research is still in its early stages and many important questions remain unanswered. According to Ulrike Thuerheimer (assistant professor in accounting at the University of Amsterdam) directions for future research include: • How do financial statement and sustainability audits interact? • What team characteristics matter? • How do materiality concepts differ between the financial statement and sustainability audits? • How does limited assurance differ from reasonable assurance concerning sustainability? • How to measure the quality of sustainability reporting (and assurance), possibly with the help of AI? • What is the impact of (changes in) European regulation? • What are cross-country differences in what parties are allowed to provide sustainability assurance? • How will the market and auditors react to future enforcement cases? Ulrike underlines the importance of FAR in helping to get access to relevant data. This video is an addition to Ulrike’s FARview podcast that was published last July: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsTz2AFlpSc FAR also recently published a booklet with 5 summaries of interesting articles on sustainability assurance. Here’s a link to the pdf of the publication: https://lnkd.in/eUCQnv6c There is also a Dutch version available: https://lnkd.in/eMc64NVK

Ulrike Thuerheimer is an assistant professor in accounting at the University of Amsterdam. Her research focuses on financial auditing and sustainability assurance. In this podcast, she covers several topics. She takes a closer look at the current state of sustainability assurance regulation in Europe and in the United States. She then discusses how research in sustainability assurance compares to research in financial auditing, highlighting both the similarities and the differences. She also outlines the main categories of research in sustainability assurance and wraps up with key findings and practical take-aways. Youtube version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsTz2AFlpSc FAR also recently published a booklet with 5 summaries of interesting articles on sustainability assurance. Here’s a link to the pdf of the publication: https://foundationforauditingresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Far-boekje-EN-0366.pdf There is also a Dutch version available: https://foundationforauditingresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Far-boekje-NL-0359.pdf More about Ulrike Thuerheimer: She got her PhD-degree at the University of Maastricht. She’s broadly interested in studying auditing and ESG assurance. Her research interests are mainly driven by regulation and standard setting, for example concerning group audits and the economics and value of auditing. She’s also participating in several FAR projects, which can be found on the FAR website (www.foundationforauditingresearch.org).

On April 2 2025, Joe Brazel (North Carolina State University) gave a FAR-masterclass on this important question at Nyenrode University During this highly interactive meeting he presented the findings from several of his research studies on the evaluation and support of professional skepticism in audit teams. Audit professionals are expected to apply professional skepticism, especially when signs point to potential fraud. But how is that skepticism evaluated by supervisors? Is it judged more by the outcome of the investigation than by the quality of the process? And what changes when supervisors begin to reward skepticism based on how it's applied, rather than what it uncovers? And does the active support by the audit committee increase auditors’ skepticism? If you want to get a taste of what happened, please check out this 15-minute summary of the event. Version on Youtube : https://youtu.be/SVV27XpJvsY Two of the papers that Joe Brazel presented have also been previously summarized in the FAR booklet ‘What can we learn from auditing research?’, which can be found on the FAR-website: https://foundationforauditingresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/far-artikelen-boekje-juni23-02w.pdf More information on Joe Brazel’s FAR-projects can be found on the FAR website: https://foundationforauditingresearch.org

Can culture controls improve audit quality? Well, according to Jasmijn Bol and her co-authors they can! In this FARview, Professor Jasmijn Bol (Tulane University) talks about her paper ‘Can culture controls improve audit quality’. This is joint work together with Isabella Grabner (WU Vienna), Katlijn Haesebrouck (Maastricht University) and Mark E. Peecher (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign). They investigated how cultural controls can improve audit quality. It is key to build in the internalization of audit quality as a core value. First, that requires socialization. There should be a focus on supportive leadership, by building an audit voice culture. That means that there's open communication, that people are tolerant of making mistakes and that there's a lot of appreciation for learning. Another part of supportive leadership is resource facilitation: make sure that there is a budget that allows for action-oriented skepticism. Second, selection is important. When hiring, retaining, and promoting auditors, the personal values of these people should be closely aligned to the values that you're trying to socialize and internalize. The personal values of importance are care about societal interests (wanting to contribute to society) and ‘being a true seeker’ (wanting to get to the bottom of things). Full version on Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKINm9L0VA4 Pitch-version on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcatd-wDJNg

In this FAR podcast Sara Bibler (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) talks about the purpose, findings and takeaways of the study ‘Thinking Outside of the Box: Engaging Auditors’ Innovation Mindset to Improve Auditors’ Fraud Procedures’ (co-authored by Margaret Christ, Tina Carpenter, and Anna Gold). Auditors face complex challenges, for example in fraud detection, where creative thinking is essential. Building on the creativity literature, the research team studied whether an ‘innovation mindset’ leads to more effective fraud procedures. Furthermore, because regulatory bodies have expressed concerns that focusing on client insights might detract from audit quality, this study also examined whether these concerns are justified. Key findings: Auditors prompted to adopt an innovative mindset identified more effective fraud detection procedures, improving audit quality without any reduction in efficiency. Importantly, the goal of providing client insights did not diminish audit quality and could coexist with fraud detection goals without negative effects. The video can also be found on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS0BsOX4rps More information about the FAR research of the team can be found on the FAR website: https://foundationforauditingresearch.org/en/research-publications/projects/2019b02-engaging-auditorsa-innovation-mindset-to-improve-fraud-detection-with-data-analytics-prof-dr-gold/

What are the main drivers of auditors' skeptical actions? This pitch provides a quick feel for the answers to this important question, provided by a recent study by Kris Hardies, Sanne Janssen, Ann Vanstraelen and Maastricht University and Karla M. Zehms. The title of the paper is ‘Using Field-Based Evidence to Understand the Antecedents to Auditors’ Skeptical Actions’. It has been accepted for publication in Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. In this pitch Kris Hardies (University of Antwerp) answers 7 questions: 1. Who are you? 2. What did you study in the paper? 3. Why is it relevant? 4. What’s new? 5. What did you find? 6. What can auditors and stakeholders learn from the findings? 7. What would be the best way to read the paper? Sneak preview: the top factors driving the skeptical actions of auditors are: feelings of accountability, trait skepticism, the intention to behave skeptically and the professional orientation of the firm. The paper is available here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3717615 More information on the FAR-project regarding professional skepticism can be found here (e.g. FAR conference summaries, podcasts, masterclass report and working paper): https://foundationforauditingresearch.org/en/research-publications/projects/2016b05-professional-skepticism-profiles-effects-on-audit-processes-and-outcomes-and-the-moderating-role-of-audit-firm-culture-dr-hardies/ This pitch is also available via Youtube: https://youtu.be/OKLL29_a-GE

In this short podcast/video, Therese Grohnert (Maastricht University) and Petra Tijmstra (NBA and PwC) talk about how they have experienced their joint FAR research project. The project can be viewed as a best practice of a symbiotic cooperation between practice and academia with mutual benefits. Therese and Petra discuss the conditions, yields, success factors and take-aways of their collaboration. Bottom line: ‘Don’t be afraid, just give it a try!’ The related video can also be viewed here: https://youtu.be/LTzqTJKxINE Do you want to see more? Petra and Therese also presented their work at the 2023 FAR annual conference. Their presentation can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/live/-8qMiz3W4Xs?feature=share&t=6225

Hoe kan een auditcommissie het accountantscontroleteam ondersteunen? Waardoor voelen accountants zich het meest gesteund? Wat zijn de gevolgen van die steun op het gebied van professional skepticism? En maakt het iets uit wie de steun vanuit de auditcommissie communiceert? Op die vragen geeft het onderzoek van Joe Brazel, Anna Gold, Justin Leiby en Tammie Schaefer een antwoord. Anna Gold (hoogleraar Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) belicht in deze pitch twee onderzoeken die samen de basis vormen van het FAR-project ‘How do audit committees support audit engagement teams and encourage professional skepticism’. Het gaat om een survey en een experiment. In de survey is onderzocht in welke mate en op welke manieren auditcommissies support bieden aan auditteams. In het experiment is onderzocht of support van de auditcommissie de professioneel-kritische houding van de accountant vergroot en of het verschil maakt wie (de voorzitter van de auditcommissie of de partner) de support richting het controleteam communiceert. De bevindingen van de survey laten onder andere zien dat in ongeveer de helft van de controleopdrachten het controleteam ondersteuning ervaart vanuit de auditcommissie. Die ondersteuning wordt vooral gecommuniceerd door de partner of manager van het team. Veel respondenten geven overigens aan nooit informatie te ontvangen over steun van de auditcommissie. Bijna 70 procent van de deelnemers zegt in het geval van support vooral ‘emotionele steun’ te hebben ervaren (waarbij de auditcommissie bijvoorbeeld interesse toont in de bevindingen, beschikbaar is voor vergaderingen en begrip toont voor moeilijkheden). Andere vormen van steun worden in mindere mate gevoeld (bijvoorbeeld het mogelijk maken van samenwerking met het bestuur en het delen van inzichten over de klant). De resultaten van het experiment suggereren dat het communiceren van steun vanuit de auditcommissie de accountant kan helpen om professioneel-kritisch te handelen bij een cliënt met een onvriendelijke houding ten opzichte van de accountant. Het maakt daarbij niet uit wie de support vanuit de auditcommissie communiceert. Het communiceren van steun vanuit de auditcommissie helpt dus de accountant! Een up-to-date versie van het artikel kan hier worden gedownload: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4003607 Voor meer informatie over het FAR-project, zie: https://foundationforauditingresearch.org/en/research-publications/projects/2018b04-how-can-audit-committee-support-improve-auditorsa-application-of-professional-skepticism-prof-dr-gold/ Deze pitch is ook te beluisteren/bekijken via Youtube: https://youtu.be/avoaUh4RRwg

Gaan lange werkweken ten koste van de kwaliteit van de accountantscontrole? Het antwoord is helaas: ‘ja’. Tjibbe Bosman (promovendus Universiteit van Amsterdam en verbonden aan de Foundation for Auditing Research) bespreekt in deze pitch een artikel van Christensen, Newton en Wilkins: ‘How do team workloads and team staffing affect the audit? Archival evidence from U.S. audits.’ De onderzoekers vinden dat werkweken van 55 uur en langer schadelijk zijn voor de kwaliteit van de accountantscontrole. Zij vinden, onder andere, ook dat continuïteit binnen het controleteam in opeenvolgende jaren kwaliteitsverhogend werkt. Deze effecten gelden met name voor assistenten en seniors. Het is dus belangrijk voor accountants, toezichthouders en andere belanghebbenden om oog te hebben voor de werkdruk van accountants en de continuïteit binnen de teams. Het artikel is gepubliceerd in Accounting, Organizations and Society (Volume 92, July 2021) Link naar het artikel: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2021.101225 Ook beschikbaar via SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418533 Deze pitch is ook te beluisteren/bekijken via Youtube: https://youtu.be/IoKw1kuq7VY