會計師事務所發展及應用數位審計之探討—以台灣四大會計師事務所為例

Abstract

本論文透過訪談與問卷調查，探討台灣四大會計師事務所發展與應用數位審計之情形，以及查核人員對於使用查核分析之接受度。 本論文發現四大會計師事務所對於發展查核分析之動機、應用查核分析所面臨之挑戰、因應挑戰之方式、應用查核分析所能獲得之預期效益、查核分析工具發展之現況與歷程，以及對數位審計之未來展望的大方向皆相似。在接受度方面，整體而言，受試者認同使用查核分析進行查核確實具有效益且受到審計準則支持，事務所亦提供足夠之輔助。事務所間在因應挑戰與發展數位審計工具之具體行動雖然有較大的差異，但該等差異並未顯著影響不同事務所之查核人員對於使用查核分析之接受度。 深究影響查核人員對查核分析接受度之原因，本論文發現查核人員是否感受到使用查核分析之效益為影響其接受度的關鍵。另外，管理職與非管理職間在查核分析工具操作上之困難、使用查核分析可能會增加客戶之工作量，以及事務所提供之輔助之認同程度存有落差，隱含注重非管理職之感受，將能更有效地發現並解決實務上的痛點，有助於發揮查核分析之效益，進而提升查核人員之接受度。 本論文亦發現不論接受度或職級高低，皆面臨正確地判讀並解釋查核分析的結果之困難，顯示查核分析工具只是協助分析之輔助，並未淡化專業判斷的重要性。

By interviews and questionnaire surveys, this study explores the development and application of digital auditing as well as the acceptance of auditors applying audit data analytics (ADA) technique in the Big Four accounting firms in Taiwan. Interview results indicates similar findings among Big Four in the following aspects: the motivation for the development of ADA, the challenges arising from applying ADA, the ways responding to the challenges, the expected benefits of applying ADA, the current situation and history of the development of digital audit tools, and the future outlook of digital auditing. In terms of the acceptance of auditors applying ADA, the auditors surveyed agree that the use of ADA is indeed beneficial and supported by the auditing standards and the Big Four also provide sufficient support. Although some differences exist in the specific ways to respond to challenges and the development of digital audit tools, they didn’t significantly affect the acceptance of the use of ADA among auditors from different audit firms. Investigating the reasons that affect the acceptance of auditors applying ADA, this paper finds that the perception of benefits of using ADA is the key factor to affecting auditors’ acceptance. In addition, there are differences between management and non-management positions in the following aspects: the difficulty in using ADA tools, the perceived workload of the client, and the sufficiency of the support by the Big Four. They imply that taking into account the perception of non-management positions will be able to more effectively find and solve the pain points in practice. It’s also useful to maximize the benefit of ADA and enhance the acceptance of auditors for using ADA. This paper also finds that regardless of acceptance or position, it is difficult for auditors to correctly interpret the data analysis results, which implies that the ADA tools do not replace the professional judgment.