skip to main content
10.1145/3463531.3463539acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicettConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Determinants Affecting Intention of Use of Big Data Analytics on Remote Audits: TOE Framework Approach

Published:20 July 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemics, auditors are required to do remote audit from their home or office. With the limitation of movement of the auditor, big data is the solution for the auditor as the data availability in large amounts in order to make the right decision where the process can be done quickly in effective and efficient ways. In order to help auditors do their jobs, it requires a supporting factor on doing remote audit which is technology, organization and environment. The possibilities to do audit with population based increased the fraud detection and quality of audit generated by the audit process. This article intends to define the differences, roles, fraud detection and impact of big data analytics on audit quality generated from remote audit process. This study used questionnaire to the respondents who have criteria of having experience in audit process, in order to determine which factors influence remote audit process.

References

  1. K. Deniswara, B. L. Handoko, and A. N. Mulyawan, “Big data analytics: Literature study on how big data works towards accountant millennial generation,” Int. J. Manag., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 376–389, 2020, doi: 10.34218/IJM.11.5.2020.037.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. B. L. Handoko, A. N. Mulyawan, J. Tanuwijaya, and F. Tanciady, “Big Data in Auditing for the Future of Data Driven Fraud Detection,” Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 9, no. 3, 2020, doi: 10.35940/ijitee.b7568.019320.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. D. Appelbaum, A. Kogan PhD, and M. A. Vasarhelyi PhD, “Introduction to Data Analysis for Auditors and Accountants: Certified Public Accountant,” CPA J., 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. L. Tornatzky and M. Fletscher, “The Deployment of Technology,” in The Processes of Technological Innovation, 1990, pp. 118–147.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. M. J. A. Bick, : “Diffusion of Innovations . Everett M. Rogers.,” Am. Anthropol., 1963, doi: 10.1525/aa.1963.65.5.02a00230.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. E. M. Rogers, A. Singhal, and M. M. Quinlan, “Diffusion of innovations,” in An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research, Third Edition, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. M. El-Helaly, C. G. Ntim, and M. Al-Gazzar, “Diffusion theory, national corruption and IFRS adoption around the world,” J. Int. Accounting, Audit. Tax., vol. 38, p. 100305, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2020.100305.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. S. A. Li, L. Jeffs, M. Barwick, and B. Stevens, “Organizational contextual features that influence the implementation of evidence-based practices across healthcare settings: A systematic integrative review,” Syst. Rev., vol. 7, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0734-5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. P. Russom, “Introduction to Big Data Analytics,” 2011. doi: 10.1017/9781108566506.005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. Fosso Wamba, S. Akter, A. Edwards, G. Chopin, and D. Gnanzou, “How ‘big data’ can make big impact: Findings from a systematic review and a longitudinal case study,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 165, pp. 234–246, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.12.031.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. R. A. Teeter, M. G. Alles, and M. A. Vasarhelyi, “The remote audit,” J. Emerg. Technol. Account., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 73–88, 2010, doi: 10.2308/jeta.2010.7.1.73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. P. Castka, C. Searcy, and S. Fischer, “Technology-enhanced auditing in voluntary sustainability standards: The impact of COVID-19,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1–24, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12114740.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. S. Verma, S. S. Bhattacharyya, and S. Kumar, “An extension of the technology acceptance model in the big data analytics system implementation environment,” Inf. Process. Manag., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 791–806, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2018.01.004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. H. Li, J. Dai, T. Gershberg, and M. A. Vasarhelyi, “Understanding usage and value of audit analytics for internal auditors: An organizational approach,” Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst., vol. 28, no. November 2017, pp. 59–76, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.accinf.2017.12.005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. B. L. Handoko, N. Ayuanda, and A. T. Marpaung, “Organizational, Social and Individual Aspect on Acceptance of Computerized Audit in Financial Audit Work,” Adv. Sci. Technol. Eng. Syst. J., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 55–61, 2020, doi: 10.25046/aj050308.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. M. S. Kamarulzaman and N. H. Hassan, “A Review on Factors for Big Data Adoption towards Industry 4.0,” Open Int. J. Informatics, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 200–207, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. K. Rosli, E.-G. Siew, and P. H. P. Yeow, “Technological, Organisational and Environmental Aspects of Audit Technology Acceptance,” Int. J. Bus. Manag., vol. 11, no. 5, p. 140, 2016, doi: 10.5539/ijbm.v11n5p140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. M. Pizzini, S. Lin, and D. E. Ziegenfuss, “The impact of internal audit function quality and contribution on audit delay,” Auditing, 2015, doi: 10.2308/ajpt-50848.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. J. T. Roscoe, Fundamental Research Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston, 1975.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Sugiyono, Metode Education Research. Approach Quantitative, Qualitative, and R & D. Bandung: Alfabeta, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. K. Rosli, P. Yeow, and E.-G. Siew, “Factors Influencing Audit Technology Acceptance by Audit Firms: A New I-TOE Adoption Framework,” J. Account. Audit. Res. Pract., vol. 2012, pp. 1–11, 2012, doi: 10.5171/2012.876814.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. M. Tarek, E. K. A. Mohamed, M. M. Hussain, and M. A. K. Basuony, “The implication of information technology on the audit profession in developing country: Extent of use and perceived importance,” Int. J. Account. Inf. Manag., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 237–255, 2017, doi: 10.1108/IJAIM-03-2016-0022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. K. Rosli, P. H. P. Yeow, and S. Eu-Gene, “Adoption of audit technology in audit firms,” Proc. 24th Australas. Conf. Inf. Syst., no. December, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. J. Bierstaker, D. Janvrin, and D. J. Lowe, “What factors influence auditors’ use of computer-assisted audit techniques?,” Adv. Account., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 67–74, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.adiac.2013.12.005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. E. G. Siew, K. Rosli, and P. H. P. Yeow, “Organizational and environmental influences in the adoption of computer-assisted audit tools and techniques (CAATTs) by audit firms in Malaysia,” Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst., vol. 36, no. xxxx, p. 100445, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.accinf.2019.100445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. R. Widuri, B. L. Handoko, and I. C. Prabowo, “Adoption of information technology in public accounting firm,” 2019, doi: 10.1145/3335484.3335500.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. D. Janvrin, J. Bierstaker, and D. J. Lowe, “Accounting Horizons,” Account. Horizons, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 525–528, 2016, doi: 10.2308/1558-7975-30.4.525.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. P. Harsanti, I. Ghozali, and A. Chariri, “Determinants of internal auditors behavior in whistle blowing with formal retaliation and structural anonimity line as moderating variables (empirical study at state-owned enterprises in Indonesia),” Int. J. Appl. Bus. Econ. Res., 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. I. Ghozali and L. Hengky, Konsep, Teknik Dan Aplikasi Menggunakan Program Smart PLS 3.0. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. U. Sekaran and R. Bougie, “Research Methods For Business. A Skill Builing Approch. 7th Edition,” Book, 2016, doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_102084.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ICETT '21: Proceedings of the 2021 7th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies
    April 2021
    163 pages
    ISBN:9781450389662
    DOI:10.1145/3463531

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 20 July 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format