Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
Accounting Information System Effectiveness, Foreign Ownership
and Timeliness of Corporate Financial Report
Hassan Tazik* and Zakiah Muhammadun Mohamed**
Timeliness is clearly considered as an important qualitative characteristic of financial
information. Financial information users need to obtain reliable, relevant and timely
information, in order to survive in a highly competitive environment. Therefore, a study on the
timeliness of financial statements is essential.
This study examines the impact of accounting information system effectiveness (AISE) and
foreign ownership structure (FOS) on audit report lag (ARL) and investigates the moderating
role of FOS on this relationship. Data are obtained through structured questionnaire survey
administrated on senior accountants from companies listed on Bursa Malaysia and
secondary data are collected from participants’ financial annual reports in 2011. A total of 97
companies participated in this study. A multiple regression analysis is used in this study,
modeling ARL as a function of explanatory variables. The results indicate that FOS is a
strong moderator for the relationship between AISE and ARL. Further, a significant negative
relationship is found between AISE and FOS with ARL. Additionally, the findings show a
significant negative relationship between company size and audit committee expertise as
control variables with ARL. Overall, the findings in this study provide some evidence
supporting the resource based theory, which identify AISE as a resource that could improve
timeliness of corporate reporting.
Accounting
1. Introduction
Timeliness of financial reported information is clearly considered as an important qualitative
characteristic of financial information. Recently, as the financial market is facing globalization
and liberalization, timely information is required to assist users in making decisions. Timeliness
of corporate annual financial report is considered to be a critical and an important factor affecting
the usefulness of information to external users such as, financial analysts, professional bodies,
investors, managers, academicians, stakeholders and regulatory authorities. Jaggi&Tsui
(1999)argue that investors need timely information in order to decrease asymmetric
dissemination of financial information and the growth of investing community as a whole.
Leventis et al.(2005) state that this timely information may prompt capital attraction and
investors’ confidence in the capital market. Therefore, the timeliness of information releases is
considered as an essential component for a well-functioning capital market (Fagbemi&Uadiale
2011). It is also recognized that capital market has been significantly influenced by the
timeliness; however this information will lose some of its economic value after a short period of
time from the end of the reported period (Al-Ajmi 2008).
According to the laws and regulation, a company can only release verified financial statements
by external auditors. Empirical evidence provided from prior studies show that the timeliness of
annual audit report is the most important factor affecting the timeliness of corporate financial
reporting (Leventis et al. 2005; Owusu-Ansah 2000). The length of the audit process highly
*Mr. Hassan Tazik, Faculty of Economic and Management, UKM, Malaysia, Email: hasan.tazik@gmail.com
**Dr. Zakiah Muhammadun Mohamed, UKM, Malaysia, Email: zmm@ukm.my
Page 1
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
affects the timeliness of corporate financial reporting. In current study timeliness is measured by
the time taken between firm financial year end and the date of audit report which is called ARL.
In recent years, business environments have undergone rapid changes. Technology and
telecommunication are improving, trade barriers are decreasing and economies are integrating.
Firms’ businesses activities are significantly increased from a domestic focus to globalization via
exporting, licensing, foreign direct investing and other international activity (Buckley 2002).
Ettredge et al. (2006) state that audit failures of the early 2000s have raised concerns about the
timeliness and reliability of accounting reports.
Now than ever before, financial information users need to obtain reliable, relevant and timely
information (Saira et al. 2010) in order to survive in a highly competitive environment.
Effectiveness of accounting information system (AIS) is reliability, relevance, and timeliness
which may produce many amounts of data for using by decision makers both within and outside
organizations. Chaiyot (2012) study shows that AISE enhance usefulness via information trust
and timeliness. It may provide reliable information and gives opportunities to accountants to
improve their works (Chaiyot 2012). Furthermore, the timeliness and reliability of the information
will be generated when the information comes from the effective AIS that links the business
process and activities because the information is generated by the place that it happens and is
sent to users as soon as they want (Chaiyot 2012). Therefore, AISE may mitigate the concern of
professionals and regulatory bodies for companies to provide reliable and timely information.
In addition, timely financial information is considered as an important means to attract the
attention of the investors (Bamber et al. 1993; Ettredge et al. 2006). In order to overcome the
existence of asymmetric information problem between foreign and local investors with
managers, investors are likely to invest in companies for which timely information is more easily
available (Ahearne et al. 2000; Portes&Rey 2005). Timely financial statements assist foreign
ownership to preserve their investment by monitoring the management’s performance and
making efficient decision as soon as possible. Moreover, asymmetric dissemination of financial
information and uncertainty associated with investment decisions will be reduced by timely
information (Ashton et al. 1987; Jaggi&Tsui 1999). Thus, following these studies, firms that held
significant amount of their shares by foreign investors will have the incentive to provide more
timely information to those investors.
Accordingly, this study investigates the impact of AISE and FOS on ARL. Additionally, the
moderating role of FOS on the relationship between AISE and ARL will be examined.
2. Literature Review
Given the importance of timely audited report, many accounting researchers have studied the
phenomenon of audit delay in different countries, in Egypt (Afify 2009), in Greece (Leventis et al.
2005), in Malaysia (Hashim&Abdul Rahman 2011), in Spain (Bonsón‐ Ponte et al. 2008), in
Bahrain (Al-Ajmi 2008), in New Zealand (Habib&Bhuiyan 2011), in Jordan (Alkhatib&Marji 2012),
in UK (Abdelsalam&Street 2007), in Nigeria (Fagbemi&Uadiale 2011), in Bahrain and UAE
(Khasharmeh&Aljifri 2010), in Turkey (Dogan et al. 2007).
In Spain, Bonsón-Ponte et al.(2008) found that company size and the industry sector have a
negative association with audit delay. In Turkey ((Dogan et al. 2007) report that good news
companies release their annual reports sooner than bad news companies. It is also found that
Page 2
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
company size, increased financial risk, and the timing policy of previous years significantly effect
on the timing of annual report releases.
Alkhatib and Marji (2012) investigate the association between auditors’ type and ARL. They
found a negative association between them. Khasharmeh and Aljifri (2010) found that audit type
has weak effect on audit delay in Bahrain, whereas this study found negative association
between audit type and ARL in UAE. In another study, Al-Ajmi (2008) argued that auditors’ type
including Big four and non-big four audit firms, negatively effect on audit lag.
Recently, some researchers attempt to include corporate governance as a factor that may
associate with timeliness of financial reporting (Abdelsalam&Street 2007; Al-Ajmi 2008;
Habib&Bhuiyan 2011; Mohamad-Nor et al. 2010). Habib and Bhuiyan (2011) examined audit
committee independence, audit committee diligence and audit committee expertise as the
characteristics of audit committee. The result of study indicated that audit committee
independence and audit committee expertise may assist in reducing ARL.
To summarize, previous studies on determinants of audit lag shows that it is influenced by
clients, auditors, financial factors and corporate governance. The next subsection discusses the
possible association between AISE and FOS with ARL and develop the related hypotheses.
Figure 1: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Foreign
Ownership
H3 (+)
Structure
H2 (-)
H3
Accounting Information
System Effectiveness
H1 (-)
Audit
Report Lag
Control variables:
Company size
Leverage
Profitability
Industry type
Audit opinion
Type of auditor
Audit committee independence
Audit committee meeting
Audit committee expertise
Page 3
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
2.1 Hypotheses Development
2.1.1aise
Analytical literature, mainly based on Dye (1985) model, predicts that managers would prefer
releasing only information which will increase current firm value. Besides, profitable firms have
the incentive to distinguish themselves from less profitable ones in order to attract more capital
(Grossman&Hart 1980). Corporate disclosure aims at increasing firm value and reducing the risk
of being undervalued by the market. Cross-listing is likely to enhance the disclosure level of a
firm.
Prior literature suggests that the presence of effective AIS will increase the monitoring of
management and reduce the incidence of management or misreporting and delays in the
financial
reporting
processes
(Chaiyot
2012;
Ditkaew&Ussahawanitchakit
2010;
Kanyamon&Sumalee 2012). Suggesting effective AIS should improve internal control and
reduce business risk, hence have an effect on shorter audit delay (Chaiyot 2012).
AISE helps a firm to decrease risk in business operations, which results to protect the
organization from fraud and dishonesty and enhance efficiency and effectiveness of employee
work (Ditkaew&Ussahawanitchakit 2010), therefore audit work and hours taken by the auditor to
complete annual audit work will be reduced. The underlying assumption is that, AISE is more
likely to reduce audit delay and thus improve the financial reporting.
Jaggi and Tsui (1999) argue that larger companies have more resources to set up proper AISE,
which may be resulted to decrease the propensity for financial statement errors to occur and
enable auditors to trust on controls more extensively and reduce the time of auditing.
Then, based on the above discussion the following hypothesis is developed:
H1: There is a negative association between AISE and ARL.
2.1.2 FOS
Arens et al. (2005) and Bamber et al.(1993) argue that auditors associate companies with lower
acceptable audit risk when external users place heavy reliance on its corporate audited financial
statements. A good evidence of this situation is when more proportion of the company’s share is
owned by outside shareholders than the share owned by insider shareholders.
Bamber et al.(1993) suggest that auditor business risk influences the acceptable audit risk in the
engagement, and then the extent of audit work required. ARL can be enhanced by the increased
extent of audit work. Several audit researches demonstrate the association between the extent
to which the client’s shares are widely held and audit business risk (Arens et al. 2005; Brumfield
et al. 1983). In an empirical study by Bamber et al.(1993), negative association between
company’s ownership structures and ARL is found. Ettredge et al.(2006) also found a similar
result for a quarterly earnings release lag.
Leventis et al.(2005) argue that in emerging market economies, timely reported financial
information, for the most part, is the only means by which outside shareholders and investors
keep themselves informed of the firm performance. In order to overcome the existence of
asymmetric information problem between foreign and local investors with managers, investors
are likely to invest in companies for which timely information is more easily available (Ahearne et
al. 2000; Portes&Rey 2005). Thus, following these studies, firms that held significant amount of
Page 4
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
their shares by foreign investors will have the incentive to provide more timely information to
those investors.
Then, based on the above discussion the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2. There is a negative association between FOS and ARL.
Corporate governance literature on ownership construction argues that foreign investors have a
vital role to control and monitor management (Gillan&Starks 1998; Muhamad Sori&Karbhari
2005). This is because of the contradiction of interest between principal and owners
(Jensen&Meckling 1976). Emphasizing of such important activism, Gillan&Starks (1998) argue
that the management of the poor performing firms can be under the pressure by the owners to
improve shareholder value. Following this, due to the important of timely financial information to
the investors, foreign ownership also can perform their role actively and monitor management
effectively by increasing pressure on them to release timely corporate reports including audited
financial statements.
As management desires to attract more investors, AISE can be used by them to meet their
investors’ needs. It has the capacity to report accounting information as fast as possible
(Yeunyong&Ussahawanitchakit 2009). Additionally, It helps a firm to decrease risk in business
operations, which results to protect the organization from fraud and dishonesty and enhance
efficiency and effectiveness of employee work (Ditkaew&Ussahawanitchakit 2010), therefore
audit work and hours taken by the auditor to complete annual audit work will be reduced. The
underlying assumption is that, AISE is more likely to reduce audit delay and thus improve the
financial reporting delay.
Hence, the following hypothesis is developed:
H3. FOS positively moderates the relationship between AISE and ARL.
3. The Methodology and Model
The empirical work in this study is based on the data collected by survey and annual reports of
companies listed in Bursa Malaysia. The sample and regression model, described as follows.
3.1 Sample
The sample covers Malaysian listed companies for year 2011. The total number of participants
was 97 companies. The time audit lag data on the sample companies were obtained from their
annual reports. The year end date for which the financial reports were prepared is represented
by balance sheet date. The AISE of the companies was extracted from the questionnaires. The
figures for foreign ownership were calculated from the information provided in the annual
reports. Further, the profit, total assets, company industry and other variables were collected
from the annual reports (Table 1).
3.2 Regression model
A multiple regression analysis is used in this study, modelling ARL as a function of explanatory
variable. Besides, using variables which are found related to ARL in previous research as control
variables, the AISE and FOS are used as independent and moderating variables respectively.
Page 5
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
The regression model is adapted from prior studies (Bamber et al. 1993; Leventis et al. 2005;
Mohamad-Nor et al. 2010). This
Table 1: Description of variables and sources
Variables
Variable
name
ARL
AISE
Definition
Audit report
lag
Measurement expected
Number of days elapsing between the
end of the fiscal year and the completion
of the audit for the current year
Effectiveness score
Expected
relationship
with ARL
Source
of data
Annual
reports
SIZE
Accounting
information
system
effectiveness
Foreign
ownership
structure
Company size
PROF
Profitability
Net income to year-end total assets
Negative
IDUS
Industry type
Negative
LEV
Leverage
AUDTYPE
Audit type
AUDOP
Audit opinion
ACIND
Audit
committee
independence
Audit
committee
meeting
Dummy variable, 1 if a company is
financial, 0 if otherwise
Proportion of long-term debt (excluding
deferred tax) to total equity
Dummy variable, 1 if auditor is one of the
former Big-4 audit firms, 0 otherwise
Audit opinion issued by auditor,
represented by a dummy variable: “1”
proportion of independent nonexecutive
directors on audit committee
1, if at least 4 audit committee meetings
are held during the year, 2 for the
meeting above 6, and 0 for less than 4
meeting.
proportion of the audit committee
members who have accounting, auditing
or related financial management
expertise
Negative
Annual
reports
Negative
Annual
reports
FOS
ACMEET
ACEXP
Audit
committee
expertise
Negative
Question
naire
Percentage of company shares held by
the foreigners
Negative
Annual
reports
Natural log of year-end total assets
Negative
Annual
reports
Annual
reports
Annual
reports
Annual
reports
Annual
reports
Annual
reports
Annual
reports
Positive
Negative
Negative
Negative
model is used to test the association between the dependent variable of audit report lag (ARL)
and independent variable of accounting information system effectiveness (AISE), moderating
variable of foreign ownership structure (FOS), and control variables of company size (SIZE),
profitability (PROF), industry type (INDS), leverage (LEV), audit opinion (AUDOP), audit type
(AUDTYPE), audit committee independence (ACIND), audit committee meeting (ACMEET) and
audit committee expertise (AC EXP).
Page 6
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
The regression model is as follows:
ARL = β0 + β1(AISE) + β2(FOS) + β3(AISE*FOS)+ β4(SIZE) + β5(PROF) + β6(IDUS)+
β7(LEV)+ β8(AUDOP)+ β9(AUDTYPE)+ β10 (ACIND)+ β11(ACMEET)+ β12 (ACEXP)+ є.
4. The findings
Table 2: Descriptive statistics
Variables
ARL
AISE
FOS
SIZE
PROF
IDUS
LEV
AUDTYPE
AUDOP
ACIND
ACMEET
ACEXP
N
Valid
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
97
Missing
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
98.021
3.8513
0.1142
8.5607
0.0281
0.031
0.206
0.577
0.021
0.8645
1.186
0.5407
22.68
0.716
0.166
0.679
0.104
0.174
0.369
0.497
0.143
0.16
0.441
0.224
42
2
0
7.1018
-0.502
0
0
0
0
0.6
0
0.2
122
5
0.6835
10.557
0.1792
1
3.1
1
1
1
2
1
4.1 Descriptive statistics
Table 2 indicates the descriptive statistics of dependent, independent, moderating and control
variables. Using data from 97 observations from financial and non-financial listed companies on
the Malaysia Stock Exchange in 2011, it was found that the average audit lag period was 98.02
days with a minimum of 42 days and a maximum period of 122 days. This means that Malaysian
listed companies take approximately 3 months on average beyond their balance sheet dates and
the date of auditor’s report.
4.2 Correlation analysis
Emory (1982) suggest that multicullinearity may be a problem when the correlation between
independent variables is 0.80, whereas Kaplan (1982) considered more than 0.90 to be
problematic. The table 3 displays the Pearson Correlation. The highest correlation is between
ARL and AISE at -0.457. It is obvious from table 3 that the correlation between variables seems
to indicate no serious multicollinearity problems. As appear in Table 4, the variance inflation
factor (VIF), has been less than ten for each variable and tolerance is more than 0.10, which
suggests that the multicollinearity problem is not severe (Belsey et al. 1980).
Page 7
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
Table 3: Pearson Correlation Matrix
ARL
ARL
FORO
WN
AISE
SIZE
PROF
IDUS
AUDT
YPE
LEV
AUDO
P
SIZE
1
.457**
.420**
.330**
PROF
-.210*
0.065
0.064
.361**
1
IDUS
-0.019
-0.1
-0.001
.278**
-0.002
1
LEV
AUDT
YPE
AUDO
P
ACIN
D
ACME
ET
ACEX
P
0.064
-0.003
0
.267**
0.005
-0.07
1
-0.052
0.106
0.025
.281**
0.079
0.032
0.075
1
0.141
-0.115
-0.054
-.234*
-.216*
-0.026
-0.067
-0.17
1
0.028
-0.026
0.131
-0.096
-0.002
-0.073
-0.15
-.209*
0.124
-0.002
-0.154
-0.069
.236*
0.058
0.06
0.082
0.124
-.236*
0.036
0.142
0.011
0.06
.315**
0.052
0.018
AISE
FOS
ACI
ND
ACM
EET
ACEX
P
1
.301**
1
0.167
0.143
1
-0.061
1
0.034
1
-0.137
0.069
-0.031
1
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
4.3 Results of regression analysis
4.3.1 Hypothesis Testing
This section presents the result of hypotheses’ testing. The association between independent
variable (AISE), moderator (foreign ownership) and dependent variable (ARL) are discussed in
this section.
H1 expects a negative relationship between AISE and ARL. The regression results for the model
are shown in table 4. The findings support this hypothesis and provide evidence that AISE
significantly impact on ARL. This means that higher level of AISE would decrease ARL.
H2 predicts a negative association between FOS and ARL. The link between these variables, as
shown in table 5.4, generated a coefficient value of -0.223 which is significant at 0.012. Hence,
hypothesis 2 is supported, which states that FOS negatively impact on ARL. This means that
higher proportion of foreign ownership would reduce ARL.
Page 8
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
Table 4: Coefficients
Coefficients
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model
1 (Constant)
Standardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
207.114
26.015
AISE
-10.521
2.684
FOS
-30.488
Collinearity
Statistics
Beta
t
Sig.
Tolerance
VIF
7.961
.000
-.332
-3.919
.000
.894
1.119
11.882
-.223
-2.566
.012
.852
1.174
SIZE
-6.363
2.921
-.191
-2.178
.032
.838
1.193
PROF
-20.094
18.774
-.092
-1.070
.287
.866
1.154
ACEXP
-16.602
8.254
-.164
-2.011
.047
.969
1.032
-3.622
1.594
-.188
-2.273
.025
.941
1.063
AISE.FOS
a. Dependent Variable: ARL
4.3.2 Moderation Analysis
Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to investigate the moderating effect of
FOS on the relationship between AISE and ARL. The results are presented in table 5.
Table 5: Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analyses
Coefficients
step 1
SIZE
PROF
ACEXP
AISE
FOS
AISE.FOS
B
-9.845
-19.592
-23.089
step 2
P
0.005
0.378
0.018
B
-7.601
-19.291
-21.697
-12.85
step 3
P
0.016
0.337
0.014
0
B
-6.789
-19.085
-18.241
-10.544
-35.563
step 4
P
0.025
0.323
0.033
0
0.004
B
-6.363
-20.094
-16.602
-10.521
-30.488
-3.622
F
6.343
11.309
11.598
10.968
P.val
0.001
< 0.001
< 0.001
< 0.001
Adj.R2
R2
0.143
0.412
0.3
0.574
0.356
0.624
0.384
0.65
P
0.032
0.287
0.047
0
0.012
0.025
Hypothesis 3 expected a positive interaction of foreign ownership structure on the association
between AISE and ARL. The findings support this hypothesis and provide evidence (T value 2.273 and P value 0.025) that foreign ownership structure has significant interaction on the
relationship between AISE and ARL. Then H3 is accepted.
Page 9
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
Table 6: Conditional Effect of Focal Predictor at Values of the Moderator Variable
Conditional Effect of Focal Predictor at Values of the Moderator Variable
FOROWN
-0.1657
0
0.1657
b
-5.4627
-10.5215
-15.5797
se
3.4935
2.6843
3.4809
t
-1.5637
-3.9195
-4.4758
p
0.1214
0.0002
0
5. Summary and Conclusions
This study provides empirical evidence relating to the ARL of companies listed on Bursa
Malaysia in the year 2011, through identifying the impact of AISE and FOS on ARL. Moreover, it
displays the interacting role of foreign ownership structure on the relationship between AISE and
ARL.
The analysis of sample companies listed on Bursa Malaysia indicates that the mean of ARL is
more than 98 days. The ARL for each of the 97 listed sample companies ranged from a
minimum interval of 42 days to a maximum interval of 122 days and Malaysian listed companies
take approximately three months on average. The results indicate that AISE and foreign
ownership structure significantly affect on ARL. Also, foreign ownership structure has significant
interaction on the relationship between AISE and ARL. Further, two control variables significantly
affected ARL (company size and audit committee expertise), but profitability not to be
significantly associated with ARL. The adjusted R 2 demonstrates that 38.4 per cent of the
variation in the dependent variable in the regression model is explained by variations in the
independent variables.
References
Abdelsalam, O. H. & Street, D. L. 2007. Corporate Governance and the Timeliness of
Corporate Internet Reporting by Uk Listed Companies. Journal of International
Accounting, Auditing and Taxation 16(2): 111-130.
Afify, H. 2009. Determinants of Audit Report Lag: Does Implementing Corporate Governance
Have Any Impact? Empirical Evidence from Egypt. Journal of Applied Accounting
Research 10(1): 56-86.
Ahearne, A., Griever, W. & Warnock, F. 2000. “Information Costs and Home Bias: An Analysis
of Us Holdings of Foreign Equities”. Mimeo, Federal Reserve Board.
Al-Ajmi, J. 2008. Audit and Reporting Delays: Evidence from an Emerging Market. Advances
in Accounting 24(2): 217-226.
Alkhatib, K. & Marji, Q. 2012. Audit Reports Timeliness: Empirical Evidence from Jordan.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 62(1342-1349.
Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J. & Beasley, M. S. 2005. Auditing and Assurance Services. An
Integrated Approach
Ashton, R. H., Willingham, J. J. & Elliott, R. K. 1987. An Empirical Analysis of Audit Delay.
Journal of Accounting Research 25(2): 275-292.
Bamber, E., Bamber & Schoderbek, A. M. 1993. Audit Structure and Other Determinants of
Audit Report Lag: An Empirical Analysis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 1-23.
Page 10
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
Belsey, D. A., Kuh, E. & Welsch, R. E. 1980. Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential
Data and Sources of Collinearity. John Wiley.
Bonsón‐Ponte, E., Escobar‐Rodríguez, T. & Borrero‐Domínguez, C. 2008. Empirical Analysis
of Delays in the Signing of Audit Reports in Spain. International journal of auditing 12(2):
129-140.
Brumfield, C. A., Elliott, R. K. & Jacobson, P. D. 1983. Business Risk and the Audit Process.
Journal of Accountancy 155(4): 60-68.
Buckley, P. J. 2002. Is the International Business Research Agenda Running out of Steam?
Journal of International Business Studies 33(2): 365-373.
Chaiyot, S. 2012. The Effect of Accounting Information System Effectiveness on Accounting
Information Usefulness Via Information Trust and Information Timeliness as Mediators:
Case Study of Thai-Listed Companies. International Jornal of Business Research 12(1):
111-121.
Ditkaew, N. & Ussahawanitchakit, P. 2010. Success of Erp Implementation in Thai Industrial
Firms: An Empirical Research of Its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of
Academy of Business and Economics 10(1): 39-50.
Dogan, M., Coskun, E. & Celik, O. 2007. Is Timing of Financial Reporting Related to Firm
Performance? An Examination on Ise Listed Companies. International Research Journal
of Finance and Economics 12(220-223.
Dye, R. A. 1985. Disclosure of Nonproprietary Information. Journal of Accounting research
23(1): 123-145.
Emory, E. 1982. Business Research Methods, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, Il.
Ettredge, M. L., Li, C. & Sun, L. 2006. The Impact of Sox Section 404 Internal Control Quality
Assessment on Audit Delay in the Sox Era. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory
25(2): 1-23.
Fagbemi, T. & Uadiale, O. 2011. An Appraisal of the Determinants of Timeliness of Audit
Report in Nigeria: Evidence from Selected Quoted Companies. The New Orleans
International Academic Conference New Orleans, Louisiana USA, hlm.
Gillan, S. & Starks, L. 1998. A Survey of Shareholder Activism: Motivation and Empirical
Evidence. Contemporary Finance Digest 2(3): 10-34.
Grossman, S. J. & Hart, O. D. 1980. Disclosure Laws and Takeover Bids. The Journal of
Finance 35(2): 323-334.
Habib, A. & Bhuiyan, M. B. U. 2011. Audit Firm Industry Specialization and the Audit Report
Lag. Journal of international accounting, auditing and taxation 20(1): 32-44.
Hashim, U. & Abdul Rahman, R. 2011. Audit Report Lag and the Effectiveness of Audit
Committee among Malaysian Listed Companies. International Bulletin of Business
Administration 10(50-61.
Jaggi, B. & Tsui, J. 1999. Determinants of Audit Report Lag: Further Evidence from Hong
Kong. Accounting and Business Research 30(1): 17-28.
Jensen, M. C. & Meckling, W. H. 1976. Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency
Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of financial economics 3(4): 305-360.
Kanyamon, W. & Sumalee, L. 2012. How Does Internal Control Effectiveness Create
Relaiability of Financial Reporting? An Emprical Research of Thai-Listed Firms. Journal
of International Business and Economics 12(2): 80-96.
Kaplan, R. 1982. Advanced Management Accounting, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, Nj.
Khasharmeh, H. & Aljifri, K. 2010. The Timeliness of Annual Reports in Bahrain and the
United Arab Emirates: An Empirical Comparative Study. The International Journal of
Business and Finance Research 4(1): 51-71.
Page 11
Proceedings of 5th Asia-Pacific Business Research Conference
17 - 18 February, 2014, Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-44-3
Leventis, S., Weetman, P. & Caramanis, C. 2005. Determinants of Audit Report Lag: Some
Evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange. International Journal of Auditing 9(1): 45-58.
Mohamad-Nor, M. N., Shafie, R. & Wan-Hussin, W. N. 2010. Corporate Governance and
Audit Report Lag in Malaysia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and
Finance (AAMJAF) 6(2): 57-84.
Muhamad Sori, Z. & Karbhari, Y. 2005. The Impact of Selected Corporate Governance
Programmes to Auditor Independence: Some Evidence from Malaysia. Yusuf, The
Impact of Selected Corporate Governance Programmes to Auditor Independence: Some
Evidence from Malaysia (December 2005)
Owusu-Ansah, S. 2000. Timeliness of Corporate Financial Reporting in Emerging Capital
Markets: Empirical Evidence from the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange. Accounting and
business research 30(3): 241-254.
Portes, R. & Rey, H. 2005. The Determinants of Cross-Border Equity Flows. Journal of
international Economics 65(2): 269-296.
Saira, K., Zariyawati, M. A. & Annuar, M. N. 2010. Information System and Firms’
Performance: The Case of Malaysian Small Medium Enterprises. International Business
Research 3(4): P28.
Yeunyong, W. & Ussahawanitchakit, P. 2009. Ais Success of Thai Foods Businesses: An
Empirical Investigation of Its Antecedents and Consequences. International Journal of
Business Strategy 9(1): 13-29.
Page 12