Despite the volume of auditing research over the last decade, relatively little is known about auditors apply specific codified requirements. We use organisational routines as a schematic and Power's (2003) distinction between the front and backstage of an audit to explore the link between the broad prescriptions in ISA 701 and the micro-level performances of individual auditors to report key audit matters (KAMs). Interviews with 42 senior staff from large and mid-tier audit firms reveal how the ostensive elements of auditing routines result in coercive, normative and mimetic forces. These forces regulate and coordinate how audit procedures are executed to yield a frontstage representation of technical and procedural rigour. Yet, at the performative level experience, professional judgement and dynamic operating environments counter isomorphic forces. The messier backstage of activities provides an opportunity for minor modifications to audit procedures which can accumulate and impact the routine at the ostensive level. That the responsibility for the reporting KAMs vests with engagement leaders increases the opportunity for variability as they exercise professional judgement to modify the routine. Overall, our paper adds to the literature on how auditing is socially constructed and reveals how technical concepts are “transmitted” among individual practitioners to illuminate an understudied aspect of auditing. The study provides an original action-orientated perspective of how routines work in professional settings. It complements the largely inferential work on KAM determinants and should be relevant for standard-setters conducting a post-implementation review of ISA 701 and regulators monitoring KAM reporting.

中文翻译：

---

审计师如何识别和报告关键审计事项——组织惯例的角度

尽管过去十年的审计研究量很大，但人们对审计师应用具体的成文要求知之甚少。我们使用组织惯例作为示意图，并使用 Power（2003）对审计前台和后台的区分来探讨 ISA 701 中的广泛规定与报告关键审计事项 (KAM) 的个体审计员的微观绩效之间的联系。对来自大中型审计公司的 42 名高级员工的采访揭示了审计例程中的明示元素如何产生强制力、规范力和模仿力。这些力量规范和协调审计程序的执行方式，以产生技术和程序严谨性的前台表现。然而，在执行层面上，经验、专业判断和动态操作环境会对抗同构力量。更加混乱的后台活动为对审计程序进行细微修改提供了机会，这些修改可能会累积起来并影响明示层面的例行公事。报告 KAM 的责任由参与领导者承担，这增加了他们运用专业判断来修改例行程序时出现变化的机会。总体而言，我们的论文补充了有关审计如何在社会上构建的文献，并揭示了技术概念如何在个体从业者之间“传播”，以阐明审计的一个未被充分研究的方面。这项研究提供了一个以行动为导向的原创视角，以了解日常工作在专业环境中的运作方式。它补充了关于 KAM 决定因素的大部分推论工作，并且应该与对 ISA 701 进行实施后审查的标准制定者和监控 KAM 报告的监管机构相关。