SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Denetişim / 2026 / Sayı: 35

CLIENT ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA OF INDEPENDENT AUDIT FIRMS: EVIDENCE FROM TRANSPARENCY REPORTS

BAĞIMSIZ DENETİM FİRMALARININ MÜŞTERİ KABUL KRİTERLERİ: ŞEFFAFLIK RAPORLARI ÜZERİNDEN BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Eray Çetin(OSMANİYE KORKUT ATA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DÜZİÇİ MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0001-8552-9584
Journal
Denetişim
Pages
377–388
Publication Date
2026-08-23
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal that the client acceptance process is not based solely on financial risks, but rather constitutes a multidimensional evaluation process in which ethical, operational, and independence-related factors are also taken into consideration.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Independent auditing activities constitute a multi-stage process extending from client acceptance to the preparation of the audit report.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, the reports of a total of 68 independent audit firms operating in Türkiye, performing audits of Public Interest Entities (PIEs), and publishing transparency reports between 2022 and 2024 were analyzed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal that the client acceptance process is not based solely on financial risks, but rather constitutes a multidimensional evaluation process in which ethical, operational, and independence-related factors are also taken into consideration.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Bağımsız Denetim · Müşteri Kabulü · Denetim Firması

Abstract

Independent auditing activities constitute a multi-stage process extending from client acceptance to the preparation of the audit report. Client acceptance, which represents the initial stage of this process, is a critical step carried out by audit firms through various investigations and evaluations. This study examines the criteria considered by independent audit firms during the client acceptance process based on transparency reports. In this context, the reports of a total of 68 independent audit firms operating in Türkiye, performing audits of Public Interest Entities (PIEs), and publishing transparency reports between 2022 and 2024 were analyzed. The findings reveal that the client acceptance process is not based solely on financial risks, but rather constitutes a multidimensional evaluation process in which ethical, operational, and independence-related factors are also taken into consideration. In this respect, the study aims to contribute to the literature by examining client acceptance criteria through the transparency reports publicly disclosed by independent audit firms and revealing how these criteria are reflected in practice.

Özet

Bağımsız denetim faaliyetleri, müşteri kabulünden denetim raporunun hazırlanmasına kadar uzanan çok aşamalı bir süreçtir. Bu sürecin ilk aşamasını oluşturan müşteri kabulü, denetim firmaları tarafından çeşitli araştırma ve değerlendirmeler sonucunda gerçekleştirilen önemli bir adımdır. Bu çalışmada, bağımsız denetim firmalarının müşteri kabul sürecinde dikkate aldıkları kriterler şeffaflık raporları üzerinden incelenmiştir. Bu kapsamda Türkiye’de faaliyet gösteren ve 2022–2024 yılları arasında Kamu Yararını İlgilendiren Kuruluşların (KAYİK) denetimini gerçekleştiren ve şeffaflık raporu yayımlayan toplam 68 bağımsız denetim firmasına ait raporlar analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, müşteri kabul sürecinin yalnızca finansal risklere dayanmadığını; aynı zamanda etik, operasyonel ve bağımsızlık boyutlarını da içeren çok boyutlu bir değerlendirme süreci olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu yönüyle çalışma, müşteri kabul sürecine ilişkin kriterleri bağımsız denetim firmalarının kamuya açıkladıkları şeffaflık raporları üzerinden inceleyerek, uygulamadaki yansımalarını ortaya koyması bakımından literatüre katkı sunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çetin, E. (2026). CLIENT ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA OF INDEPENDENT AUDIT FIRMS: EVIDENCE FROM TRANSPARENCY REPORTS. Denetişim, Sayı: 35, 377–388. https://doi.org/10.58348/denetisim.1912181

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. Asare, S., Hackenbrack, K., & Knechel, R. W. (1994). Client acceptance and continuation decisions. Auditing Symposium XII: Proceedings of the 1994 Deloitte & Touche/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, pp. 163-178.
  2. Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8-14.
  3. Cebi, S., Karakurt, N. F., Kurtulus, E., & Tokgoz, B. (2024). Development of a decision support system for client acceptance in independent audit process. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 53, 1-23, 100683.
  4. Davutyan, N., & Kavut, L. (2006). Bağımsız denetimde müşteri kabul riskinin veri zarflama analizi yoluyla ölçülmesi. İ.M.K.B. Dergisi, 9(33), 85-106.
  5. Denhere, V., & Moloi, T. (2020). Engagement risk factors related to client acceptance of an engagement: A case of Zimbabwean audit firms. Southern African Journal of Accountability and Auditing Research, 22(1), 59-70.
  6. Drira, M. (2013). Toward a general theory of client acceptance and continuance decisions. Journal of Comparative International Management, 16(1), 37-52.
  7. Erlingsson, C., & Brysiewicz, P. (2017). A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 7(3), 93-99.
  8. Hwang, N. C. R., & Chang, C. J. (2010). Litigation environment and auditors’ decisions to accept clients’ aggressive reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 29(3), 281-295.
  9. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2020). International Standard on Quality Management (ISQM) 1: Quality Management for Firms that Perform Audits or Reviews of Financial Statements, or Other Assurance or Related Services Engagements. New York: International Federation of Accountants.
  10. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). (2022). International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 220 (Revised): Quality Management for an Audit of Financial Statements. New York: International Federation of Accountants.
  11. Johnstone, K. M. (2000). Client‐acceptance decisions: Simultaneous effects of client business risk, audit risk, auditor business risk, and risk adaptation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 19(1), 1-25.
  12. Kamu Gözetimi, Muhasebe ve Denetim Standartları Kurumu (KGK). (2018). Bağımsız Denetim Standardı (BDS) 220: Finansal Tabloların Bağımsız Denetiminde Kalite Kontrol. Ankara.
  13. Keskin, D. A., Mollaahmetoğlu, E., & Gözüaçık, Y. G. (2019). Kalite güvence mekanizması olarak şeffaflık raporları: Türkiye’deki bağımsız denetim kuruluşlarına yönelik bir araştırma. Muhasebe ve Denetime Bakış, 19(58), 157-172.
  14. Mande, V., Son, M., & Song, H. (2017). Auditor search periods as signals of engagement risk: Effects on auditor choice and audit pricing. Advances in Accounting, 37, 15-29.
  15. Mironiuc, M., Chersan, I. C., & Robu, I. B. (2013). The influence of the client’s background on the auditor’s decision in acceptance the audit engagement. Communications of the IBIMA, 2013, (1), 1-16.
  16. Özbirecikli, M., & Süslü, C. (2005). Bağımsız denetim firmalarının yolsuzluk riski faktörlerini değerleme uygulamaları ve Türkiye’deki bağımsız denetim firmaları üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir araştırma-1. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (27), 67-85.
  17. Sakin, İ., & Türk, Z. (2019). Characteristics of independent audit firms in terms of independent audit quality and audit revenue: A research on independent audit firms. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 7(3), 200.
  18. Stemler, S. (2000). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(1), 1-6.
  19. Suryani, D., & Sitorus, T. (2017). The client risk and the audit planning: Influence of acceptance of audit engagement. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 10(3), 183-198.
  20. Yessie, A., Avianti, I., & Sofia, P. (2023). Determinants of client acceptance decisions and the impact on the reputation of public accounting firms in Indonesia. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 17(2), 147-167