JUDGEMENT STATE AUDITOR ON AUDIT OPINION FOR GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL STATEMENT WITH PERSPECTIVE HERMENEUTIC PHENOMENOLOGY

Authors

  • Dwi Setiawan Susanto BPK RI
  • Made Sudarma Brawijaya University PhD Program
  • sutrisno - Brawijaya University
  • rosidi - Brawijaya University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijabs.2019.27.2.2

Abstract

Background. The Audit Act no 15, 2004 stated that audit opinion is based on 4 (four) criterias, which are accounting standard, compliance on law and regulation, effectivity internal control system and full disclosure. Public accountability quality of financial statement that audited by BPK RI should be based on State Finance Audit Standard (SPKN) and audit system or guidelines to attest the truth and fairness of the judgement. State finance auditor will make audit judgement for audit opinion based on all material of financial statement, not only in quantitative but also qualitative manner of significance financial information as part of public accountability. However, audit process is not only depends on structured standard system approach but also influenced by individual (auditor) subjectivity. Auditor subjectivity is difficult to be avoided during the audit process and may play a role in the audit judgement and final audit opinion.Objective. Our study aims to analyze the role of BPK RI auditor subjectivity during audit judgement in government institution and in making final audit opinion, using interpretive hermeneutic phenomenology.Methods. Our study analyzed audit judgement with interpretive process hermeneutic and phenomenology perspective.Results. We conducted in-depth interviews with BPK audit opinion signing auditors and analyzed how auditor interpreted audit data, in regards with the basic principles of public accountability, audit standard, law and regulation, internal control and complexity organization in the auditee institution. Our study found differences among auditors in interpreting audit data based on different perspective and understanding of standard system, law and regulation and complexity of organization, mostly because they did not use basic principles of public accountability during the process and making audit judgement and final audit opinion.Conclusion. Our results came to understanding that auditors should be using basic principles of public accountability when interpreting audit data, audit standard, law and regulation to improve quality of audit judgement. Auditors of BPK as supreme audit institution in Indonesia should combine all aspects in auditing process and making final audit judgment.Key words : Audit Opinion, Public Accountability, Audit Judgement, Hermeneutic Phenomenology.

Author Biography

Dwi Setiawan Susanto, BPK RI

Public Sector Accounting

References

Abdolmohammadi, M and A. Wright., 1987., An Examination of Effect of Experience and Task

Complexcity on Audit judgment., Journal of The Accounting Review., LXII (1) : 1-13..

Agger, Ben. 2003. Teori Sosial Kritis: Kritik, Penerapan dan Implikasinya. Yogyakarta: Kreasi

Wacana.

Awasthi, V. and Pratt, J. (1990). “The effects of monetary incentives on effort and decision

performance: the role of cognitive characteristicsâ€, The Accounting Review, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 797-811

Burrel, G and Gareth, M. 1979. Sociological Paradigms ang Organizational Analysis : Elements

of the Sociology of Corporate Life. London : Heinemann.

Chang, C.J., Ho, J.L.Y. and Liao, W.M. (1997), “The effects of justification, task complexity and

experience/training on problem-solving performanceâ€, Behavioral Research in Accounting, Vol. 9, pp. 98-116.

Chua, Wai Fong (1986), “Radical Developments in Accounting Thoughtâ€, The Accounting Review, v 61, pp 601 – 632.

Chung, J. and G. S. Monroe., 2001., A Research Note on The Effect of Gender and Task

Complexity on Audit judgment., Journal of Behavioral Research., 13: 111-125.

Cloyd, C.B. (1997), “Performance in tax research tasks: the joint effects of knowledge and

accountabilityâ€, The Accounting Review, Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 111-31.

Creswell, J. W. and D. L. Miller, 2000, "Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry", Theory Into

Practice, 39, 3, pp.124â€130

Emby, Craig. 1994. Framing and presentation mode effects in professional judgment: auditors’

internal control judgments and substantive testing decisions. A Journal of Practice and Theory, 13, 102-115.

Francis, J.E. (1994). Auditing, Hermeneutics, and Subjectivity. Accounting, Organizations and

Society, 19(3), 235-269.

Hamidi. (2004). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif: Aplikasi Praktis Pembuatan Proposal dan Laporan

Penelitian. Malang: UMM Press.

Hartanto, S. Y., 1999., Analisis Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan Terhadap Judgment Auditor. Tesis Program Pascasarjana Universitas Gadjah Mada., Yogyakarta.

Haryanto, 2012. Interaksi Individu – Kelompok sebagai Pemoderasi Pengaruh Framing dan urutan Bukti terhadap Audit Judgment Studi pada Sektor Pemerintahan. Disertasi : Malang Universitas Brawijaya.

Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology (W. R. Boyce, Trans.). London: Allen & Unwin.

International Federation of Accountant (IFAC). Handbookof International Standard s on Auditing and Quality Controll. e – Book.

Jamilah, S., Z. Fanani, dan G. Chandrarin, 2007. Pengaruh Gender, Tekanan Ketaatan, Dan Kompleksitas Tugas Terhadap Audit Judgment. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X, Makassar, Juli.

Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky, 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica. 47 (2): 263-291.

Lavoie, David (1987) "The Accounting of Interpretations and the Interpretation of Accounts: The Communicative Function of the Language of Business". Accounting, Organizations and Society 12(6), p. 579-604.

Libby, R. and M. G. Lipe. 1992. Incentives, effort, and the cognitive processes involved in accounting-related judgments. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 249-273

Llewellyn, S. (1993), “Working in Hermeneutic Circles in Management Accounting Research: Some Implications and Applicationsâ€, Management Accounting Research, No. 4, pp. 231-249.

Moleong, J. 2008. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung.

Muhadjir, H. N. (2000). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif: Edisi IV, Penerbit Rake Sarasin.

Pentland, B. T. (1993). “Getting comfortable with the numbers: Auditing and the micro-production of macro-orderâ€, Accounting, Organization and Society, Vol. 18(7-8). Pp 605-620

Ricoeur, P. (1974), The Conflict of Interpretations: Essays in Hermeneutics, Ihde, D. (Ed.), Northwestern University Press: Evanston.

Ricoeur, P. (1981), Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation, Thompson, J. B. (Ed.), Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Ricoeur, P. (2012). Teori Interpretasi, Memahami Teks, Penafsiran, dan Metodologinya. : (Penerjemah : Musnur Hery). Yogyakarta : IRCiSoD

Ricoeur, P. (2012). Hermeneutika Sosial : (Penerjemah : Muhammad Syukri). Edisi Keempat Bantul : Kreasi Wacana.

Ruegger, D., and E.W. King., 1992., A Study of The Effect of Age and Gender Upon Student Business Ethics., Journal of Business Ethics., 11: 179-186.

Salim, A. 2006.Teori & Paradigma Penelitian Sosial, Buku Sumber Untuk Penelitian Kualitatif. (second edition). Penerbit Tiara Wacana, Jogyakarta.

Satori, D., & Komariah, A. (2010). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif: Cetakan ke-2, Penerbit Alfabeta, Bandung.

Sarantakos, S. (1955). Social Research : Macmillan Education Australia PTY LTD.

Scott-Baumann, A. (2003). “Reconstructive Hermeneutical Philosophy: Return Ticket to Human

Condition.†Philosophy & Social Criticism, Vol 29 (6). pp 703 – 727.

Standar Pemeriksaan Keuangan Negara (SPKN). 2007. Peraturan BPK No. 1 Tahun 2007, Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan.

Stuart, I., 2001., The Influence of Audit Structure on Auditor Performance in High and Low

Complexity Task Setting. Journal of Accounting Behavior., 3-30.

Suartana, I. W., 2005. Model Framing dan Belief Adjustment dalam Menjelaskan Bias Pengambilan Keputusan Pengauditan, Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VIII, Solo, September.

Trisnaningsih, S dan S. Isnawati., 2003., Perbedaan Kinerja Auditor Dilihat dari Segi Gender.,

Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VI., 1036-1047.

Trotman, K. T. (1997), Research Methods for Judgement and Decision Making Studies in Auditing, Coopers & Lybrand.

Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman, 1981. The Framing of Decision and The Psychology of Choice. Science Vol. 211 (30): 453-458.

Tuanakotta, T.M. , 2011. Berpikir Kritis dalam Auditing. Jakarta , Salemba Empat

Undang-Undang No. 15 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan Pengelolaan dan Tanggung Jawab Keuangan Negara.

van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London, ON, Canada: Althouse Press.

Willmott, H. (1993) "Paradigms of Accounting Research: Critical Reflections on Tomkins and Groves: Everyday Accountant and Researching His Reality". Accounting, Organizations and Society 18(4), p. 389-405.

Downloads

Published

2019-08-01

How to Cite

Susanto, D. S., Sudarma, M., -, sutrisno, & -, rosidi. (2019). JUDGEMENT STATE AUDITOR ON AUDIT OPINION FOR GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL STATEMENT WITH PERSPECTIVE HERMENEUTIC PHENOMENOLOGY. The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society, 27(2), 27–54. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijabs.2019.27.2.2