An Empirical Study of the Audit Expectation-Performance Gap

Abstract The critical, litigious environment which characterises auditing today can be traced to the audit expectation-performance gap. Defined as the gap between society's expectations of auditors and auditors perceived performance, it is seen to comprise ‘reasonableness’ and ‘performance’ components, the latter being subdivided into ‘deficient standards’ and ‘deficient performance’. Empirical research was conducted in New Zealand in 1989 to investigate the audit expectation-performance gap. The study enables the duties which constitute the reasonableness, deficient standards and deficient performance components of the gap to be identified. It also provides the means to estimate the relative contribution of the duties to their respective components, and of the components to the overall gap between society's expectations of auditors and auditors' perceived performance. The research provides new insights into the structure, composition and extent of the audit expectation-performance gap but, more importantly, it signals a rational, comprehensive approach towards narrowing the gap. If adopted, this should bring society's expectations of auditors and auditors' performance into closer accord and, as a consequence, reduce the criticism and litigation which auditors face today.