Can Audit Prevent Fraudulent Financial Reporting Practices? Study of Some Motivational Factors in Two Atlantic Canadian Entities

Much as has been written and done to prevent Fraudulent Financial Reporting (FFR) practices but FFR is still exists in the corporate world. It is common to think about FFR practices in large companies for its greater amount of consequences, though such practises have negative consequences in small companies as well. FFR practices raise questions about the legitimacy of contemporary financial reporting process, roles of auditors, regulators, and analysts in financial reporting. This empirical study attempts to investigate the motivational factors of the prevention and detection of FFR through the auditing process. The interviewees were carried out within the entity and proprietary theoretical framework with some accounting related management in two medium-sized organizations in Atlantic Canada in winter 2008. The findings of this research demonstrate that an audit is not enough to prevent and detect FFR. The audit structure needs to be revised and employees need to be educated in order for them to better understand their internal control process, and their own role. Companies need to evaluate their controls and internal audit process instead of relying on the yearly audit. This study found that the most common methods used for FFR are improper revenue recognition, understatement of expenses/liabilities, and overstated and misappropriation of assets.