INTUIÇÃO NO CETICISMO PROFISSIONAL DO AUDITOR

REVISÃO DA LITERATURA

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36428/revistadacgu.v15i28.636

Palavras-chave:

auditor, ceticismo, intuição, tomada de decisão, revisão de literatura

Resumo

O artigo discute o uso da intuição pelos auditores, explorando sua relevância para a detecção de fraudes. Espera-se que os auditores exibam ceticismo profissional, que inclui uma mentalidade questionadora e avaliação crítica das evidências de auditoria, mas tem havido preocupações sobre o uso insuficiente na prática. Embora a intuição seja considerada uma característica perigosa para os auditores devido ao risco de decisões tendenciosas, ela é um direcionador essencial da prática, principalmente para decisões de risco. Apesar das iniciativas de associações profissionais de contadores e auditores, reguladores governamentais e organizações internacionais de padronização para aumentar o conhecimento sobre o ceticismo profissional dos auditores, ainda falta orientação prática sobre o uso apropriado e como documentá-lo. Portanto, a questão de pesquisa é como a intuição pode ser usada no processo de auditoria para aprimorar a detecção de fraudes. Para abordar esta questão, o artigo faz uma revisão da literatura normativa, prática e da produção acadêmica sobre o uso da intuição por auditores como uma abordagem cognitiva. O artigo conclui que a literatura acadêmica é escassa, e a resistência normativa ao conceito por parte de organizações normatizadoras pode ser a causa. A tensão entre a necessidade de documentação suficiente e adequada e o exercício do ceticismo profissional cria um paradoxo para os auditores. A pesquisa encomendada de profissionais sobre o ceticismo dos auditores é essencial para unir a literatura acadêmica sobre a intuição a criação de regras por organizações profissionais e de definição de padrões. O artigo propõe uma agenda de pesquisa para as categorias: Incentivos, Tempo, Mentalidade/Prompts, Fatores Ambientais e Contextuais, Competência e Traços, sugerindo métodos alternativos de pesquisa, como estudos de caso de corrupção e escândalos financeiros. Esta contribuição é essencial para auditores, profissionais da contabilidade, reguladores e estudiosos interessados no processo de auditoria e aumentar o ceticismo profissional dos auditores.

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

Biografia do Autor

  • José Antonio Gouvêa Galhardo, Controladoria-Geral da União

    Doutor em Administração pela FEA/USP (2022). Mestre em Ciências Contábeis pela FECAP (2008). Engenheiro Naval pela UFRJ (1989). Auditor da Controladoria-Geral da União desde 2001. Experiência em Administração com ênfase em Contabilidade, Auditoria, Políticas Públicas, Tecnologias e Sistemas de Informação.

Referências

Auditing Practices Board. (2012). Professional Scepticism: Establishing a common understanding and reaffirming its central role in delivering audit quality. In Financial Reporting Council FRC. https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/3353c201-13d6-4dfb-854c-57106c272d49/Briefing-Paper-professional-scepticism-March-2012.pdf

Bennett, G. B., & Hatfield, R. C. (2015). The Effect of the Social Mismatch Between Staff Auditors and Client Management on the Collection of Audit Evidence. The Accounting Review, 88(1). https://ssrn.com/abstract=2137183

Brazel, J. F., Jackson, S. B., Schaefer, T. J., & Stewart, B. W. (2016). The outcome effect and professional skepticism. Accounting Review, 91(6), 1577–1599. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51448

Brazel, J. F., & Schaefer, T. J. (2015). Executive Summary: State of the Art Research Related to Auditor Professional Skepticism (2013 – 2015). In IAASB Meeting Summary (December 7-11, 2015) (Issue December). http://www.iaasb.org/system/files/meetings/files/20151207-IAASB-Agenda_Item_7A-Slide-Presentation-State_of_the_Art_Research_Relating_to_Auditor_Professional_Skepticism-final.pdf

Brown-Liburd, H. L., Cohen, J., & Trompeter, G. (2013). Effects of Earnings Forecasts and Heightened Professional Skepticism on the Outcomes of Client-Auditor Negotiation. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1473-5

Calabretta, G., Gemser, G., & Wijnberg, N. M. (2017). The Interplay between Intuition and Rationality in Strategic Decision Making: A Paradox Perspective. Organization Studies, 38(3–4), 365–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616655483

Carpenter, T. D., & Reimers, J. L. (2013). Professional skepticism: The effects of a partner’s influence and the level of fraud indicators on auditors’ fraud judgments and actions. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 25(2), 45–69. https://doi.org/10.2308/bria-50468

Cohen, J., Ding, Y., Lesage, C., & Stolowy, H. (2017). Media Bias and the Persistence of the Expectation Gap: An Analysis of Press Articles on Corporate Fraud. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(3), 637–659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2851-6

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. (2009). Resolução no 1203 (1203/09; pp. 1–33). CFC. http://www1.cfc.org.br/sisweb/SRE/docs/Res_1203.pdf

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. (2016). NBC TA 200 (R1) – Objetivos Gerais do Auditor Independente e a Condução da Auditoria em Conformidade com Normas de Auditoria. In Conselho Federal de Contabilidade (2016/NBCTA200(R1); pp. 1–27). CFC. http://www1.cfc.org.br/sisweb/SRE/docs/NBCTA200(R1).pdf

Dane, E., & Pratt, M. G. (2007). Exploring Intuition and Its Role in Managerial Decision Making. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.23463682

Dubsky, L. (2016). Assessing Security Controls: Keystone of the Risk Management Framework. ISACA Journal, 6, 1–4. https://www.isaca.org/Journal/archives/2016/volume-6/Pages/assessing-security-controls.aspx

Fuller, L. R., & Kaplan, S. E. (2004). A Note about the Effect of Auditor Cognitive Style on Task Performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 16, 131–143. http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A115758858/AONE?u=capes&sid=AONE&xid=2e4aaa0b

Gammie, E. (2018). Professional Skepticism Literature Review Part 1- Unconscious Bias and Professional Skepticism (Issue April). https://www.iaesb.org/system/files/meetings/files/5-2-Thought-Leadership-Role-of-Bias-in-PS_FINAL.pdf

Gelbstein, E. (2016). Auditing IS / IT Risk Management , Part 1 Risk Management. ISACA Journal, 2.

Glover, S. M., & Prawitt, D. F. (2014). Enhancing auditor professional skepticism: The professional skepticism continuum. Current Issues in Auditing, 8(2), P1–P10. https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia-50895

Ha, B. (2005). System-based Auditing and Monitoring of Government Programs and Projects. International Journal of Government Auditing, 32(4), 11–14. http://www.intosai.org/uploads/3200510e2.pdf

Hamm, K. M. (2018). Mexican Mangos, Diamonds, Cargo Shipping Containers, Oh My! What Auditors Need to Know about Blockchain and Other Emerging Technologies: A Regulator’s Perspective. https://pcaobus.org/news-events/speeches/speech-detail/mexican-mangos-diamonds-cargo-shipping-containers-oh-my!-what-auditors-need-to-know-about-blockchain-and-other-emerging-technologies-a-regulator-s-perspective_684

Hawkins, E. M., Vandervelde, S. D., & Zimbelman, A. F. (2020). When Documentation Inhibits Helpful Auditor Intuition: An Examination of Experience and Accountability. 2020 American Accounting Association Auditing Section Midyear Meeting.

Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating Intuition. The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415588081

Hsing, H. H. (2006). Disaster-Related Aid: International Symposium on Auditing Tsunami Relief Funds. International Journal of Government Auditing, 33(4), 14–17. http://www.intosai.org/uploads/oktober06eng.pdf

Hurtt, R. K., Brown-Liburd, H., Earley, C. E., & Krishnamoorthy, G. (2013). Research on auditor professional skepticism: Literature synthesis and opportunities for future research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(SUPPL.1), 45–97. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50361

International Accounting Standards Board. (2009). Impairment: guidance for variable interest rates (IASB Staff Paper). IASB.

International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2021). Handbook of International Quality Control, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance, and Related Services Pronouncements: Vol. I (2021st ed.). International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.

Ishaque, M. (2021). Managing Conflict of Interests in Professional Accounting Firms: A Research Synthesis. Journal of Business Ethics, 169(3), 537–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04284-8

Johnson, L. M., Keune, M. B., & Winchel, J. (2019). U.S. Auditors’ Perceptions of the PCAOB Inspection Process: A Behavioral Examination. Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(3), 1540–1574. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12467

Khaneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow (S. and G. New York Farrar (ed.)).

KPMG LLP, Glover, S. M., & Prawitt, D. F. (2012). Enhancing Board Oversight: Avoiding Judgment Traps and Biases. www.coso.org

Lambert, T. A., Jones, K. L., Brazel, J. F., & Showalter, D. S. (2016). Audit Time Pressure and Earnings Quality: An Examination of Accelerated Filings. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://ssrn.com/abstract=963402

Mallur, S. (2020). Predicting cybersecurity risk severity using Bayesian-based machine learning. ISACA Journal, 6, 34–41.

Nelson, M. W. (2009). A model and literature review of professional skepticism in auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 28(2), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2009.28.2.1

Owens, A., Rede, S., & Evans, B. (2018). Auditing Culture: Touch, Feely, Effective. The Journal of Local Government Auditing, Summer.

Paré, G., Trudel, M. C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information and Management, 52(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008

Persellin, J., Schmidt, J. J., Vandervelde, S., & Wilkins, M. S. (2019). Auditor Perceptions of Audit Workloads , Audit Quality , and Job Satisfaction. Accounting Horizons, 33(4), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2534492

Plumlee, D., Rixom, B. A., & Rosman, A. J. (2012). Training Auditors to Think Skeptically. 2012 Deloitte Foundation/ University of Kansas Auditing Symposium The Impact of the PCAOB on the Conduct of the Audit, 29–41. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1890779

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (2017). Auditing Standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (Issue 202). https://pcaobus.org/Standards/Auditing/Documents/PCAOB_Auditing_Standards_as_of_December_15_2017.pdf

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (2018). Auditing Accounting Estimates, Including Fair Value Accounting Estimates and Amendments to PCAOB Auditing Standards. In PCAOB Release (Issue 005). https://pcaob-assets.azureedge.net/pcaob-dev/docs/default-source/rulemaking/docket043/2018-005-estimates-final-rule.pdf?sfvrsn=568f8167_0

Ramamoorti, S., Grambling, A. A., & Behn, B. (2017). IAESB Task Force Report on Professional Skepticism.

Raval, V., & Sharma, R. (2020). The human elements of risk. ISACA Journal, 3, 15–19.

Rose, A. M., Rose, J. M., Sanderson, K.-A., & Thibodeau, J. C. (2017). When Should Audit Firms Introduce Analyses of Big Data Into the Audit Process? Journal of Information Systems, 31(3), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-51837

Tribunal de Contas da União. (2013). Acórdão 7307. https://contas.tcu.gov.br/sagas/SvlVisualizarRelVotoAcRtf?codFiltro=SAGAS-SESSAO-ENCERRADA&seOcultaPagina=S&item0=484953

Tribunal de Contas da União. (2017). Acórdão 2460. https://contas.tcu.gov.br/sagas/SvlVisualizarRelVotoAcRtf?codFiltro=SAGAS%0A-SESSAO-ENCERRADA&seOcultaPagina=S&item0=602677,

Trott, E. W., & Upton, W. S. (2001). Expected Cash Flows. In Understanding the issues (1, Vol. 1, Issue May).

United States Government Accountability Office. (2011). Government Auditing Standards: 2011 Revision (Issue December, pp. 1–220). https://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587281.pdf

Westermann, K. D., Bedard, J. C., & Earley, C. E. (2015). Learning the “Craft” of Auditing: A Dynamic View of Auditors’ On-the-Job Learning. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32(3), 864–896. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12107

Westermann, K. D., Cohen, J., & Trompeter, G. (2014). Professional Skepticism in Practice: An Examination of the Influence of Accountability on Professional Skepticism. ISAR International Symposium on Audit Research, June, 1–46. https://isarhq.org/2014_downloads/papers/ISAR2014_Westermann_Cohen_Trompeter.pdf

Wolfe, C., Christensen, B. E., & Vandervelde, S. (2014). Thinking Fast Versus Thinking Slow the Effect on Auditor. SSRN Electronic Journal, 33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2769-z.For

Wolfe, C. J., Christensen, B. E., & Vandervelde, S. D. (2020). Intuition versus Analytical Thinking and Impairment Testing. Contemporary Accounting Research, 37(3), 1598–1621. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12568

Zwirn, E. (2005). Joseph T. Wells: sound skepticism. Internal Auditor, 62(1), 73. http://go.galegroup.com/ps/pdfGenerator?tabID=&actionCmd=DO_DOWNLOAD_DOCUMENT&docId=GALE%7CA129977787&userGroupName=capes&inPS=true&prodId=AONE

Downloads

Publicado

09/27/2023

Edição

Seção

Auditoria Interna Governamental: Análise, Discussão e Persp. no Espaço Lusófono

Como Citar

INTUIÇÃO NO CETICISMO PROFISSIONAL DO AUDITOR: REVISÃO DA LITERATURA. Revista da CGU, [S. l.], v. 15, n. 28, 2023. DOI: 10.36428/revistadacgu.v15i28.636. Disponível em: https://revista.cgu.gov.br/Revista_da_CGU/article/view/636.. Acesso em: 18 maio. 2024.

Artigos Semelhantes

1-10 de 63

Você também pode iniciar uma pesquisa avançada por similaridade para este artigo.