|
|
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE AND
RESEARCH
|
FACTORS AFFECTING THE PERFORMANCE OF AUDITORS DURING
PANDEMIC COMPANIES IN HOSPITAL SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SIBOLGA
Hendra Saputra, Ayu Kurnia Sari, Ku Halim Bin
Ku Arifin, Aulia
University Pembangunan Panca
Budi, Medan, North Sumatra,
Indonesia
Email: [email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Abstract
Many factors influence the auditor in carrying out his duties to make
auditor judgment. One of the factors that influence an auditor's decision is
the individual behavior aspect of the auditor. Well-known audit research bodies
have demonstrated that a number of individual-level
factors have been shown to influence an auditor's decision. Many studies
related to the behavior of individual auditors have also been carried out. Has examined how the
influence of gender, obedience pressure, and task complexity on auditor
judgment. The results of the study state that obedience pressure has a
significant effect on auditor judgment, task complexity has
no significant effect on auditor judgment. And overall independent variables,
namely obedience pressure, and task complexity affect the dependent variable,
namely auditor judgment./auditor performance.
Keywords: factors; auditor performance
Received 20
February 2022, Revised 30 February 2022, Accepted 10 March 2022
Introduction
Many factors influence the auditor in carrying out his
duties to make auditor judgment. One of the factors that influence an auditor's
decision is the individual behavior aspect of the auditor. Well-known audit
research bodies have demonstrated that a number of individual-level factors
have been shown to influence an auditor's decision (NATASYA, 2012).
Many studies related to the behavior of individual auditors have also been
carried out. (Jamilah, Fanani, & Chandrarin, 2007) has examined how the
influence of gender, obedience pressure, and task complexity on auditor
judgment. By using a sample in the form of auditors who are at the Public
Accounting Firm (KAP) in East Java, from this study the results
obtained
that gender does not significantly affect the judgment of auditors. This is in accordance
with previous research conducted by (Dewi & Zulaikha, 2011),
but this finding contradicts the results of research from (Chung & Monroe, 2001).
The results regarding the obedience pressure variable in Jamilah's research are
also consistent with (Den Hartog et al., 1999) which shows that obedience
pressure has a significant effect on auditor judgment.
Another
independent variable, namely task complexity does not have a significant effect
on auditor judgment, according to research conducted by (Cheng
et al., 2003),
but contradicts research by (Chung
& Monroe, 2001).
Auditor performance and auditor judgment are two variables
that have a relationship. The definition of auditor performance according to (Mulyadi, 1998) in (Trisnaningsih, 2007) is a public accountant who
carries out an objective audit assignment on the financial statements of a
company or other organization with the aim of determining whether the financial
statements present fairly in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, in all material matters, financial position and results of
operations of the company.
Judgment auditor is a consideration or thought in
processing the acquisition of information (including feedback from previous
actions), the choice to take action, receiving further information, which is
the behavior of decision selection (Nugrahaningsih, 2005).
Based on this understanding, it can also be interpreted that the performance of
the auditor and the judgment of the auditor will produce an output in the form
of an opinion. Good performance will support good auditor judgment (Habibi, 2009).
Thus, the variables that affect the performance of the auditor will also affect
the judgment of the auditor. Observing the problems above, the authors make the
title in this study as follows: "factors that affect the performance of
auditors during the pandemic in hospitality service companies in the city of Sibolga
To empirically prove the pressure of obedience and task
complexity on the performance of auditors in hospitality service companies in
the city of Sibolga.
Method
Based on the characteristics of the problem studied,
this research is a quantitative research. Quantitative
research is the measurement of quantitative data and objective statistics
through scientific calculations derived from samples of people or communities
who are asked to answer a number of questions
about surveys. The research procedure carried out is to provide and
distribute to hotel auditor partners in Sibolga.
Parameters
observed
Table 1
Variable Operational Definition
|
Variable
|
Indicator
|
Definition
|
Scale
|
|
Judgment Auditor (Y)
|
-
Trying to prevent accountants from recording test samples
-
Allow accountants to record test samples
-
�Fight bosses and prevent
accountants from recording test samples
-
-Follow superiors and allow accountants to continue recording test
samples
-
Protect reputation and convey material misstatements in the audited
report
-
Keep submitting material misstatements in the audited report
|
A personal judgment or perspective of the auditor in
responding to information related to the audit responsibilities and risks
that will be faced by the auditor, which will affect the preparation of the
auditor's final opinion on the financial statements of an entity.
|
Likert
|
|
Obedience Pressure (X1)
|
-
Against wishes because they have worked professionally
-
Comply with the client's wishes even if it is against
the professional standards of the auditor
-
Don't want to get into trouble with the boss for not
doing what he wants
-
Be obedient to superiors even if it is against
professional standards
-
Defy the boss and quit the job if you have to do things
that go against professional standards
-
Opposing superiors for upholding professionalism
|
Pressure received by the auditor in
dealing with superiors and clients to take actions that deviate from ethical
standards.
|
Likert
|
|
Kompleksitas Tugas
(
X2 )
|
-
Knowing clear tasks
-
�It's not clear why you
have to do each task
-
Can make sure the task has been completed
-
Very unclear on tasks related to business functions
-
Can ensure specific tasks to be completed
-
It
is not clear how to complete each task
|
Unstructured, confusing and difficult tasks that are
interrelated with one another.
|
Likert
|
Source: Research 2020
The
type of data used is primary data. Primary data is data obtained directly from
the source
Results
and Discussion
From the results of this study, it can be shown
that a total of 15 questionnaires were distributed to respondents in the Sibolga
hotel, where 15 questionnaires were returned and
could be processed. Although the questionnaires were returned and could be
processed as many as 15 copies.
A. Data Quality Test
The results of the
validity and reliability tests are seen using the SPSS V.23 program, namely
by looking at the value of the Corrected Item-Total Correlation presented in
the table below as follows:
Source:� SPSS Results
|
Table 2
Variable Data Quality
Test
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable
|
Cronbach's
Alpha
|
Items
|
r �count
|
r �critical
|
Information
|
|
|
Obedience Pressure
|
0.682
|
P1
|
0.406
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
|
|
|
P2
|
0.563
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
|
|
|
P3
|
0.512
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
|
|
|
P4
|
0.407
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the results of data
processing above, it is obtained that all items of the obedience pressure
variable are valid and reliable
because it has an r value > 0.279 and an alpha
value > 0.60. The quality of the data for the obedience pressure variable
can be seen in the following table:
|
Table
3
Test
of Data Quality Variable Task Complexity
|
|
|
|
Variable
|
Cronbach's
Alpha
|
Item
|
r hitung
|
r kritis
|
Keterangan
|
|
Complexity
|
0.780
|
P1
|
0.372
|
0.279
|
Valid
|
|
Task
|
|
P2
|
0.598
|
0.279
|
Valid
|
|
|
|
P3
|
0.789
|
0.279
|
Valid
|
|
|
|
P4
|
0.648
|
0.279
|
Valid
|
|
|
|
P5
|
0.415
|
0.279
|
Valid
|
|
Source:� SPSS Results
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the results of data
processing above, the results obtained that all items. The obedience pressure variable is valid and
reliable because it has an r value > 0.279 and
an alpha value > 0.60. Next, the data quality
test will be carried out for the Judgment Auditor variable, following the results of the data
quality test:
|
Table 4
Test of Data Quality Variable Judgment Auditor
|
|
|
|
Variable
|
Cronbach's
Alpha
|
Items
|
r count
|
r critical
|
Information
|
|
Performance
|
0.849
|
P1
|
0.735
|
0.279
|
�valid
|
|
Auditor
|
|
P2
|
0.717
|
0.279
|
�valid
|
|
|
|
P3
|
0.547
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
|
|
P4
|
0.594
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
|
|
P5
|
0.739
|
0.279
|
valid
|
|
Source: SPSS
Results
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the results of data
processing above, it is obtained that all items of auditor performance
variables can be declared valid and reliable because they have an r value >
0.279 and an alpha value > 0.60
B.
Classic assumption test
1) Normality test
The normality of the data distribution, apart from being one of the
classic assumption tests that must
be tested in regression
analysis, is also an important requirement for determining the test equipment
that will be used to answer the hypothesis. For this reason, in this study, the
normality test was carried out by looking at the diagonal line that spreads
closer to the diagonal line. So it can be stated that
the data is normally distributed.
Figure 1
Normality Test
2)
�Multicollinearity
Test
The multicollinearity test was carried out to test whether there was a
correlation (Bhagat & Black, 2001)
among the independent
variables. Multicollinearity was tested by looking at the tolerance value and
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF).
|
Table 5
Multicollinearity Test
|
|
|
|
Independent
Variable
|
Collinearity
Statistic
|
|
|
Tolerance
|
VIF
|
|
Obedience
Pressure
|
0.987
|
1.013
|
|
Task
Complexity
|
0.987
|
1.013
|
|
Source: SPSS Results
|
|
|
In the results
of data processing carried out with the SPSS V.23 program, it shows that the
tolerance value of all variables is greater than 0.1 (> 0.1) and the VIF
value is less
than 10. The results of
this calculation shows that there is
no multicollinearity problem between the independent variables.
3) Uji Heteroskedastisitas
The results of
the heteroscedasticity test carried out through the scatterplot test can be
seen in the following figure:
Figure 2
Heteroscedasticity Test Graph
4) Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis
testing is intended to determine the effect of obedience pressure, and task
complexity as
independent variable on auditor judgment
as the dependent variable (Umar,
2008). The results of hypothesis testing can be seen in
the following
table:
|
Table
6
Hypothesis
testing
|
|
|
|
Variable
|
Coefficient
Beta
|
Standard
Error
|
t-value
|
VIF
|
Ket
|
|
(Constant)
|
8.558
|
3.646
|
2.347
|
|
|
|
Obedience
Pressure
|
0,770
|
0,148
|
5,209
|
1,013
|
S
|
|
Task
Complexity
|
-0,14
|
0,138
|
���������������
-100
|
1,013
|
S
|
|
R square�� =
|
2,90
|
F�� =
|
13,684
|
n�� =
|
70
|
|
Adj R square =
|
2,69
|
P�� =
|
0,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source: SPSS
Results
|
|
|
|
|
The results of
the hypothesis test �show that the F test value is
significant at = 0.05 (p = 0.000; p <0.05), which means that the resulting
regression equation is Y = 8.559 + 0.770X1 �0.14X2 can be used to predict the
auditor's judgment variable.
The regression
coefficient for the obedience pressure variable is 0.770, indicating that for
every 1 increase in obedience pressure, it will be adjusted to the value added
in the judgment auditor variable of 0.770. The number -0.14 in the regression
coefficient of the task complexity variable indicates the amount of the number
that will increase in the auditor's judgment variable every time it is added 1
to. Furthermore, the number 1,580 in the regression coefficient of the task
complexity variable indicates the number of numbers that will increase in the
auditor's judgment variable for every 1 increase in task complexity. Value Adj.
R Square of 26.9% means
that the judgment of the auditor
which is the dependent variable can be explained by 26.9% by the independent
variables, namely obedience pressure, and task complexity, while the remaining
0.02% is explained by other variables. The results of the above analysis show
that obedience pressure (X1) and task complexity (X2 are not significant at =
0.05, where p value = 0.920 for X2.
Simultaneously,
the two independent variables (obedience pressure, and task complexity) affect
the auditor's judgment. This matter can
be seen from the ANOVA table with a significance value of 0.000 which means it
is smaller than 0.05. This shows that the hypothesis in this study is
acceptable.
Conclusion
From the
results of this study, it can be concluded that, obedience pressure has a
significant effect on auditor judgment, task complexity has no significant
effect on auditor judgment. Overall the independent variable,namely obedience pressure, and task
complexity affect the dependent variable, namely auditor judgment./auditor
performance.
Further
researchers should add or replace research variables that may affect the
auditor's judgment. Such as auditor independence variables and so on.
REFERENCES
Bhagat, Sanjai, & Black, Bernard. (2001). The
non-correlation between board independence and long-term firm performance. J.
CorP. L., 27, 231. Google
Scholar
Cheng, Jie, Fan, DongBo, Wang, Hao, Liu, BingWei, Zhang,
YongCai, & Yan, Hui. (2003). Chemical bath deposition of crystalline ZnS thin
films. Semiconductor Science and Technology, 18(7), 676. Google Scholar
Chung, Janne, & Monroe, Gary S. (2001). A research note
on the effects of gender and task complexity on an audit judgment. Behavioral
Research in Accounting, 13(1), 111�125. Google Scholar
Den Hartog, Deanne N., House, Robert J., Hanges, Paul J.,
Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. Antonio, Dorfman, Peter W., Abdalla, Ikhlas A., Adetoun,
Babajide Samuel, Aditya, Ram N., Agourram, Hafid, & Akande, Adebowale.
(1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership
theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally
endorsed? The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219�256. Google Scholar
Dewi, Ratih Kartika, & Zulaikha, Zulaikha. (2011). Analisa
Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Praktik Perataan Laba (Income Smoothing) pada
Perusahaan Manufaktur dan Keuangan yang Terdaftar di BEI (2006-2009).
Universitas Diponegoro. Google
Scholar
Habibi, Muhammad Ridha. (2009). Pengaruh Tekanan Ketaatan,
Independensi Auditor, dan Kompleksitas Tugas terhadap Judgment Auditor pada
Kantor Akuntan Publik di Medan. Google
Scholar
Jamilah, Siti, Fanani, Zaenal, & Chandrarin, Grahita.
(2007). Pengaruh gender, tekanan ketaatan, dan kompleksitas tugas terhadap
audit judgment. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X, 1. Google Scholar
Mulyadi, Lanny. (1998). Pengaruh Kualitas Produk Terhadap
Kepuasan Pelanggan Telepon Selular Ericson GF 788 Di Surabaya. Google Scholar
NATASYA, NOVIA. (2012). PENGARUH
TEKANAN KETAATAN, KOMPLEKSITAS TUGAS DAN PENGALAMAN TERHADAP AUDIT JUDGMENT.
Universitas Pelita Harapan
Surabaya-Faculty Of Business School-Department Of. Google Scholar
Nugrahaningsih, Putri. (2005). Analisis perbedaan perilaku
etis auditor di KAP dalam etika profesi (Studi terhadap peran faktor-faktor
individual: locus of control, lama pengalaman kerja, gender, dan equity
sensitivity). Google Scholar
Trisnaningsih, Sri. (2007). Independensi auditor dan komitmen
organisasi sebagai mediasi pengaruh pemahaman good governance, gaya
kepemimpinan dan budaya organisasi terhadap kinerja auditor. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X, 10, 1�56. Google Scholar
Umar, Husein. (2008). Desain Penelitian
Akuntansi Keperilakuan. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada. Google Scholar
