This paper reviews the academic literature human after all vinyl on the different conceptualizations of audit quality.We argue that these discussions are rooted in the historical development of the audit profession, which has shown the need for audit quality indicators.However, we also demonstrate that audit quality means different things to different people, such that different conceptualizations of audit quality may lead to conflicts, as these views meet and need to be reconciled.
The literature largely recognizes the multi-faceted nature of audit quality, which cannot be simply measured by a focus ovs-02gt on adverse outcomes, such as restatements or fraud incidents.Instead, it is the combination of process, people and motivation that drives the quality of audit services provided by firms.Finally, the qualitative audit literature emphasizes that audit practice needs to be understood as a set of social interactions, which are embedded in a diverse set of organizational and contextual factors that together determine audit judgments and auditor behavior.