Ni Nyoman Alit Triani, Widi Hidayat, Ardianto Ardianto


Abstrak: Akuntabilitas Akuntan Publik dalam Memenuhi Kualitas Audit. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk melihat akuntabillitas akuntan publik dengan memenuhi peraturan IAPI Nomor 4 Tahun 2018 melalui kompetensi, etika dan independensi. Metode yang digunakan studi kasus dengan pendekatan single case with embedded. Penelitian ini menunjukkan penerapan kompetensi, etika, dan independensi akuntan publik secara keseluruhan telah diaplikasikan oleh akuntan publik untuk meningkatkan kualitas audit. Kantor akuntan publik memiliki standar kebijakan berbeda dalam meningkatkan kualitas audit. Meskipun demikian, akuntan masih bergantung dari kebijakan masing-masing kantor akuntan publik dalam hal peningkatan kompetensi.


Abstract: Accountability of Public Accountants in Fulfil Audit Quality. The purpose of this study is to see the accountability of public accountants by fulfilling IAPI regulation number 4 of 2018 through the competence, ethics and independence. The method used is a case study with a single case embedded approach. This research shows that the application of competency, ethics, and independence of accountants as a whole has been applied by accountants to improve audit quality. Public accounting firms have different policy standards for improving audit quality. Nevertheless, accountants still depend on the policies of each public accounting firm in terms of increasing competence.


akuntan publik; etika; independensi; kompetensi; kualitas audit

Full Text:



AICPA. (2014). AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. https://www.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/research/standards/codeofconduct/downloadabledocuments/2014december15contentasof2015april23codeofconduct.pdf

Alderman, J. (2017). Does Auditor Gender Influence Auditor Liability? Exploring the Impact of the Crime Congruency Effect on Jurors' Perceptions of Auditor Negligence. Advances in Accounting, 38, 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2017.07.006

Baker, C. R., Bédard, J., & Hauret, C. P. D. (2014). The Regulation of Statutory Auditing: An Institutional Theory Approach. Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(5), 371-394. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-09-2013-0931

Barrainkua, I., & Espinosa-Pike, M. (2018). The Influence of Auditors’ Professionalism on Ethical Judgement: Differences among Practitioners and Postgraduate Students. Revista de Contabilidad, 21(2), 176-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.001

Beaulieu, P., & Reinstein, A. (2010). Belief Perseverance among Accounting Practitioners Regarding the Effect of Non-Audit Services on Auditor Independence. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 29(4), 353–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2010.06.005

Bishop, W. H. (2013). The Role of Ethics in 21st Century Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 118, 635–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1618-1

Booker, K. (2018). Can Clients of Economically Dependent Auditors Benefit from Voluntary Audit Firm Rotation? An Experiment with Lenders. Research in Accounting Regulation, 30(1), 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.racreg.2018.03.008

Budescu, D. V., Peecher, M. E., & Solomon, I. (2012). The Joint Influence of the Extent and Nature of Audit Evidence, Materiality Thresholds, and Misstatement Type on Achieved Audit Risk. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 31(2), 19-41. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-10239

Chang, Y. T., Chen, H., Cheng, R. K., & Chi, W. (2019). The Impact of Internal Audit Attributes on the Effectiveness of Internal Control over Operations and Compliance. Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 15(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2018.11.002

Czerney, K., Jang, D., & Omer, T. C. (2019). Client Deadline Concentration in Audit Offices and Audit Quality. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 38(4), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-52386

Dasgupta, M. (2015). Exploring the Relevance of Case Study Research. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 19(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262915575661

DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor Size and Audit Quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1

DeFond, M., & Zhang, J. (2014). A Review of Archival Auditing Research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 58(2–3), 275–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.09.002

Deli, L., Fatma, A., & Syarif, F. (2015). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Kualitas Audit dengan Etika Auditor sebagai Moderating Variabel. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi dan Bisnis, 15(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.30596/jrab.v15i1.422

Dickins, D., Johnson-Snyder, A. J., & Reisch, J. T. (2018). Selecting an Auditor for Bradco Using Indicators of Audit Quality. Journal of Accounting Education, 45, 32-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2018.07.001

Elman, C., Gerring, J., & Mahoney, J. (2016). Case Study Research: Putting the Quant Into the Qual. Sociological Methods & Research, 45(3), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124116644273

Fauji, L., Sudarma, M., & Achsin, M. (2015). Penerapan Sistem Pengendalian Mutu dalam Meningkatkan Kualitas Audit. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 6(1), 38-52. https://doi.org/10.18202/jamal.2015.04.6005

Gao, P., & Zhang, G. (2019). Auditing Standards, Professional Judgment, and Audit Quality. The Accounting Review, 94(6), 201-225. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-52389

Glover, S. M., & Prawitt, D. F. (2014). Enhancing Auditor Professional Skepticism: The Professional Skepticism Continuum. Current Issues in Auditing, 8(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia-50895

Grossman, A. M., & Welker, R. B. (2011). Does the Arrangement of Audit Evidence According to Causal Connections Make Auditors More Susceptible to Memory Conjunction Errors? Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23(2), 93-115. https://doi.org/10.2308/bria-10063

Haines, D. (2017). Ethical Considerations in Qualitative Case Study Research Recruiting Participants with Profound Intellectual Disabilities. Research Ethics, 13(3–4), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117711971

Hurley, P. J., & Mayhew, B. Y. (2019). Market Reactions to a High-Quality Auditor and Managerial Preference for Audit Quality. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 38(4), 131-149. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-52478

Imawan, A., Irianto, G., & Prihatiningtias, Y. W. (2019). Peran Akuntabilitas Pemerintah Desa dalam Membangun Kepercayaan Publik. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 10(1), 156–175. https://doi.org/10.18202/jamal.2019.04.10009

Jamaluddin, & Syarifuddin. (2014). Ambiguitas dan Konflik Peran serta Independensi sebagai Determinan Kualitas Audit Internal. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 5(3), 421-431. https://doi.org/10.18202/jamal.2014.12.5031

Kilgore, A., Radich, R., & Harrison, G. (2011). The Relative Importance of Audit Quality Attributes. Australian Accounting Review, 21(3), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2011.00141.x

Knechel, W. R. (2016). Audit Quality and Regulation. International Journal of Auditing, 20(3), 215–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12077

Knechel, W. R., Krishnan, G. V., Pevzner, M., Shefchik, L. B., & Velury, U. K. (2013). Audit Quality: Insights from the Academic Literature. Auditing: A Journal of Practice, 32(S1), 385–421. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50350

Knipe, P. J., & Bitter, M. E. (2011). The Central Florida Emphysema Foundation Audit: A Case Study of Personal and Professional Responsibility. Issues in Accounting Education, 26(2), 377-389. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace-10002

Norton, S. D. (2018). Suspicion of Money Laundering Reporting Obligations: Auditor Compliance, or Sceptical Failure to Engage? Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 50, 56-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2017.09.003

Palmrose, Z. V., & Kinney, W. R. (2018). Auditor and FASB Responsibilities for Representing Underlying Economics—What U.S. Standards Actually Say. Accounting Horizons, 32(3), 83-90. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52074

Ramadhan, M., & Arifin, J. (2019). Efektivitas Probity Audit dalam Mencegah Kecurangan Pengadaan Barang dan Jasa. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 10(3), 550-568. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jamal.2019.10.3.32

Rowe, S. P. (2019). Auditors’ Comfort with Uncertain Estimates: More Evidence is Not Always Better. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 76, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2019.01.002

Sampet, J., Sarapaivanich, N., & Patterson, P. (2019). The Role of Client Participation and Psychological Comfort in Driving Perceptions of Audit Quality: Evidence from an Emerging Economy. Asian Review of Accounting, 27(2), 177-195. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-09-2017-0144

Schelker, M. (2012). Auditor Expertise: Evidence from the Public Sector. Economics Letters, 116(3), 432-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2012.04.051

Strohm, C. (2005). United States and European Union Auditor Independence Regulation: Implications for Regulators and Auditing Practice. Deutscheer Universitays-Verlag.

Suyono, E., & Farooque, O.A. (2019). Auditors’ Professionalism and Factors Affecting It: Insights from Indonesia. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 13(4), 543-558. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-03-2018-0073

Svanberg, J., Ohman, P., & Neidermeyer, P. E. (2019). Auditor Objectivity as a Function of Auditor Negotiation Self-Efficacy Beliefs. Advances in Accounting, 44, 121-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2018.10.001

Tepalagul, N., & Lin, L. (2015). Auditor Independence and Audit Quality: A Literature Review. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 30(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X14544505

Yang, S., Liu, Y., & Mai, Q. (2018). Is the Quality of Female Auditors Really Better? Evidence Based on the Chinese A-Share Market. China Journal of Accounting Research, 11(4), 325-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjar.2018.07.004

Zarefar, A., Andreas, & Zarefar, A. (2016). The Influence of Ethics, Experience and Competency toward the Quality of Auditing with Professional Auditor Scepticism as a Moderating Variable. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, 219, 828–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.074

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21776/ub.jamal.2020.11.1.13


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.