A great deal of research is at present being done world-wide on what is commonly referred to as the “expectation gap”. Several factors are responsible for this gap. One of these factors ¡s the wording of the standard auditor’s report, in this article the focus is on the use of the word “examination” in stead of “audit” in the auditor’s report. From the article it is clear that there are differences of opinion among members of the auditing profession and others on the synonymity or otherwise of the terms “audit” and “examination” and that this aspect definitely contributed to the expectation gap.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
D.S. Lubbe
Dave Lubbe is Professor in Oudikunde aan die Universiteit van die Oranje Vrystaat