控制風險評估之跨文化比較：以台灣與美國審計人員為例

Abstract

本研究的目的是要檢視國家文化是否會影響審計人員對風險的評估，以台灣與美國為例。先前的研究顯示國家文化常常會影響審計人員對風險的評估(Sims, 2009)，然而這些研究所使用的風險評估測量工具卻不是一般實務上審計人員常用的方式。是故，本研究採取實務取向的方式來進行風險評估的測量，使用常見的類別尺度讓審計人員評估風險，可分為高、中、低三種風險評估。本研究設計了兩種情境問卷：有利情境與不利情境，抽樣對象為台灣與美國四大會計師的審計專業工作人員，請其依據背景資訊(包含初步資訊和其他訊息)來評估風險的類別。研究結果顯示：無論是台灣或美國的審計人員，對風險的評估在卡方檢定上並無顯著差異。此外，擁有較高教育程度者，職位高者或年長者，較不會修改其對風險的最初評估。故本研究驗證了若採用審計實務常用的類別方式來評估風險，則來自不同國家文化的審計人員在風險判斷上並未有顯著差異。

The aim of this study is to determine if the cultural orientations of Taiwanese and American auditors influence their judgments differently when assessing internal control risk. Prior research has suggested this, however these studies use arbitrary scales to rank risks that are not commonly used in the accounting profession. Therefore, a more practical approach to risk assessment using a common three-tier ranking scale is warranted. Questionnaires were administered to auditing professionals at various Big 4 accounting firms in Taiwan and the United States requiring them to assess a control risk scenario. The results suggested that despite differences in national culture, there were no significant variances in how Taiwanese and Americans auditors assessed control risk. Furthermore, auditors who were more educated, older and had higher position were less likely to revise their initial risk assessment. The implications are discussed further in this study.