METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AUDIT SERVICES: FOREIGN PRACTICE AND POSSIBILITIES FOR ADAPTATION TO THE CONTEXT OF UZBEKISTAN
Keywords:
audit services, efficiency evaluation, methodological approach, audit quality indicators, adaptation index, external quality control, ranking, integral index, foreign experience, economics of service sectors, DEA modelAbstract
The article compares foreign methodological approaches to evaluating the efficiency of audit services and assesses the possibility of adapting them to the conditions of Uzbekistan. Seven approaches are examined: the audit quality indicators of the PCAOB, the shortened indicator set of the Federation of European Accountants, the inspection-based grading system of the UK Financial Reporting Council, the disclosure framework of ACRA, the audit quality framework of the IAASB, efficiency models based on DEA and SFA, and the balanced scorecard. Each approach is scored against five criteria regulatory compatibility, availability of the information base, implementation cost, human capacity and implementation time and an adaptation index is calculated. The IAASB framework (0.92), the European indicator set (0.80) and the Singapore model (0.77) prove the most suitable for national conditions, whereas the 28-indicator system of the PCAOB (0.48) and DEA models (0.44) cannot be transferred directly at the present stage. A national model of twelve indicators in three groups and a phased implementation procedure for 2026–2030 are proposed.
References
Charnes A., Cooper W.W., Rhodes E. Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units // European Journal of Operational Research. – 1978. – Vol. 2, No. 6. – P. 429–444.
DeAngelo L.E. Auditor Size and Audit Quality // Journal of Accounting and Economics. – 1981. – Vol. 3, No. 3. – P. 183–199.
Farrell M.J. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency // Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A. – 1957. – Vol. 120, No. 3. – P. 253–290.
Francis J.R. A Framework for Understanding and Researching Audit Quality // Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. – 2011. – Vol. 30, No. 2. – P. 125–152.
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. A Framework for Audit Quality: Key Elements that Create an Environment for Audit Quality. – New York: IFAC, 2014. – 76 p.
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. International Standard on Quality Management 1. – New York: IFAC, 2020.
Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. – Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996. – 322 p.
Knechel W.R., Krishnan G.V., Pevzner M., Shefchik L.B., Velury U.K. Audit Quality: Insights from the Academic Literature // Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. – 2013. Vol. 32, Supplement 1. P. 385–421.
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Concept Release on Audit Quality Indicators. Release No. 2015-005. Washington, 2015.
Federation of European Accountants. Overview of Audit Quality Indicators Initiatives. – Brussels, 2016.
Financial Reporting Council. Audit Quality Inspection and Supervision Reports. London, 2024.
Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority. Audit Quality Indicators Disclosure Framework. Singapore, 2015.
Regulation (EU) No 537/2014 on specific requirements regarding statutory audit of public-interest entities. Brussels, 2014.
Djellal F., Gallouj F. The Productivity Challenge in Services: Measurement and Strategic Perspectives // The Service Industries Journal. 2013. Vol. 33, No. 3–4. P. 282–299.
O‘zbekiston Respublikasining O‘RQ-677-son “Auditorlik faoliyati to‘g‘risida”gi Qonuni, 25.02.2021. – https://lex.uz/docs/-5307886 (Law “On Auditing Activity”).
O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining PQ-3946-son “Auditorlik faoliyatini yanada rivojlantirish chora-tadbirlari to‘g‘risida”gi qarori, 19.09.2018. https://lex.uz/acts/-3914502.
Auditorlik xizmatlari bozorining asosiy ko‘rsatkichlari to‘g‘risida hisobot. Toshkent: Iqtisodiyot va moliya vazirligi, 2024–2025. https://api.mf.uz
