English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

SUMMARY This article summarizes the published study “The Effects of Accounting Standard Precision, Auditor Task Expertise, and Judgment Frameworks on Audit Firm Litigation Exposure” (Grenier, Pomeroy, and Stern 2015), where the authors examine ways that auditors can defend their judgment during litigation regarding the appropriateness of clients' application of imprecise accounting standards. The authors find that utilizing technical experts will reduce litigation exposure arising from imprecise accounting standards because it is difficult to challenge judgments made by a recognized expert. However, the study also finds that using a framework for making high-quality professional judgments represents a cost-effective alternative to technical expertise, as doing so also constrains jurors' ability to challenge auditors' judgments. In sum, the study suggests that auditors are well equipped to handle the increased litigation exposure associated with imprecise accounting standards, and the ongoing worldwide transition to such standards is unlikely to lead to auditor herding to industry norms.