Auditors' Characteristics and Timeliness of Listed Family-Owned Firms in Nigeria

Gbadamosi, Rachael Modupe; Alade, Ezekiel Article Auditors' Characteristics and Timeliness of Listed FamilyOwned Firms in Nigeria Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems (JAMIS) Provided in Cooperation with: The Bucharest University of Economic Studies Suggested Citation: Gbadamosi, Rachael Modupe; Alade, Ezekiel (2024) : Auditors' Characteristics and Timeliness of Listed Family-Owned Firms in Nigeria, Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems (JAMIS), ISSN 2559-6004, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Vol. 23, Iss. 1, pp. 215-236, https://doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2024.01009 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/310889 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Accounting and Management Information Systems Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 215-236, 2024 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2024.01009 Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Rachael Modupe Gbadamosia and Muyiwa Ezekiel Alade 1 ,a a Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Nigeria Abstract Research question: What are the effects of auditors’ characteristics on timeliness of financial reporting among listed family-owned firms in Nigeria? Motivation: Timely issuance of audited annual financial report is highly desirable to various stakeholders against top management insider trading on the accounting information of which family-owned listed firms is highly prone to involve. Idea: This study examined the effect of auditor’s characteristics on timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. Specifically, the study investigated the extent at which auditor’s type; audit opinion; audit fee; auditor’s tenure; and joint audit affect timeliness of financial statements of listed family-owned businesses in Nigeria. Data: The data used and evaluated covered a period from 2012 to 2021, and were drawn from 47 listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. The secondary data were obtained from MachameRatio database. Tools: Both descriptive statistics and partial least square regression analyses were performed. Findings: The robust test performed revealed that Big-4 audit firms, audit opinion and audit tenure have positive effect, while audit fee and joint audit impound negative effect, on timeliness of financial statements of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. However, the result is statistically significant for audit opinion, audit tenure and audit fee. Contribution: The implication of the findings is that audit opinion and audit tenure enhance timely issuance of the financial reports of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. This study’s contributions to the body of knowledge include exploring the position of auditor’s features on timeliness of financial statements of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria which extant studies have scarcely investigated. The study recommended that listed family-owned firms in Nigeria should engage auditors for longer audit tenure among others. 1 Corresponding author: Muyiwa Ezekiel Alade, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Administration & Management Sciences, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State, Nigeria, Email address: [email protected]u.ng. Accounting and Management Information Systems 216 Vol. 23, No. 1 Keywords: Audit, audit fee, auditor, big-4, family-owned, timeliness JEL codes: M41 1. Introduction Delay in financial reporting has the propensity to affect the usefulness of financial reports of a reporting entity. Thus, timely audit report is becoming an important issue in the financial reporting parlance (Nelson & Shukeri, 2011). The timeliness of audit report is usually measured as the number of days between the fiscal year end and the date in which audit report is issued; this is often called audit report lag. The issue of timeliness is a crucial quality of financial statements that cannot be overstated, but must be appropriately addressed to retain the financial statement’s usefulness. However, several factors could be responsible for prompt or delay in issuance of audited financial reports. Public accountants, regulators, and other users of financial information over the years have been concerned about the quality of financial reports as well as financial statements (Jerry & Saidu, 2017; Rusmin & Evans, 2017; Ishak et al., 2017; Singer & Zhang, 2018; Abdillah et al., 2019; Yayaha & Awen, 2021). This is because financial report has long served as a primary mechanism for communicating the outcomes of internal activities and events to the public. It enables them to assess a company’s economic performance and condition, as well as to make economic judgments about the reporting entity (Kantudu & Alhassan, 2022). Business entity concept suggests that corporate establishment, including familyowned firms, carry out timely financial reporting. Aside from the activities of the management and other key stakeholders, auditors also contribute to enhancing timeliness of financial reporting. However, most times, unhealthy management of an organization can result to an untimely ‘death’ or minimal growth of a business. Family-owned firms refer to a business organization where decision-making is influenced by multiple family members related by blood, marriage, or adoption. This set of individuals continues to hold positions in the board/top management with the highest stockholdings and have at least a controlling or voting right of 5%. Such companies have the advantage of making quick decisions that could benefit or mar the entity. Prior researches have shown that firms and auditors’ characteristics which include size of the firm, audit opinion, audit fee, audit tenure, audit firm structure, and so on influence audit report timeliness (Singer & Zhang, 2018; Abdillah et al., 2019; Yayaha & Awen, 2021). Another identified characteristic capable of influencing auditor’s effectiveness is type of the audit firm. Study revealed that when there is a Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 217 long auditor-client connection, audit firms function more effectively, leading to timely issuance of financial report (Lee et al., 2009). At the beginning of an audit engagement, audit task is less efficient than in the subsequent years because audit companies needs time to become familiar with the business activities within their client’s organization. Meanwhile, various debates have been in place on whether companies should engage auditors for a shorter period or not. It has been observed that some publicly listed companies consistently fail to produce timely financial reports for the benefit of their users (Turel, 2010; Mouna & Anis, 2013; Reheul et al., 2014), of which Nigeria is not an exception. Specifically, overbearing influence of the executive or top management of familyowned firms portends possible cause of the identified delay in timely issuance of its audited financial reports. Whereas, one of the properties of a relevant financial statement is its timeliness, which makes it useful for decision-making. The longer a company delays its annual reports, and accompanying financial statements, the more stale the information becomes, and it becomes less useful in the capital market. Thus, the empirical question still begging for attention in the literature is the concern about the effect of auditors’ characteristics on timeliness of audited annual reports of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. Ability of the external auditors to complete their statutory auditing engagements timely will consequently inform prompt issuance of the financial report, vice versa. Several studies conducted on timeliness of financial reports aspect of accounting research include Ismail et al. (2012), Ezat (2015), Mukhtaruddin et al., (2015), Jerry and Saidu (2017), Rusmin and Evans (2017), Ishak et al.(2017), Singer and Zhang (2018), Abdillah et al. (2019), Yayaha and Awen (2021). However, none of these studies have extended this investigation to listed family-owned firms in Nigeria, especially to show whether its innate peculiarity presents a unique finding quite different from that of extant studies. Cherif, Ayadi and Hamad (2020) equally stressed that less attention has been accorded family ownership based study. Accounting information should be available as soon as possible. Information that is supplied quickly is generally more relevant to users, whereas delays in the transmission of financial information tend to make it less relevant for the users’ decision-making needs. However, there are several firm-specific intrinsic and extrinsic responsible factors. Hence, this study made attempt to investigate the effect of auditor’s characteristics such as audit fee, audit tenure, joint audit, audit opinion, auditor type on the timeliness of financial statement of family-owned firm in Nigeria. Outcome of the study was envisaged to provide policy implication for capital market regulators especially in the developing nations like Nigeria, auditing firms, and investors of listed family-owned firms. The study is structured into five separate sections which are introduction, literature review, data and methods, results and discussion of findings, conclusion and recommendations. Accounting and Management Information Systems 218 Vol. 23, No. 1 2. Literature review and hypothesis development The section presents review of relevant and related concept, theory, empirical studies, thereby paving way for identified gap the study made attempt to fill. 2.1 Auditor’s characteristics Every auditing firm or auditor has its unique peculiarity, although in the similitude of others. That is, all auditors collect audit fees, but distinct from one another. Audit firms that audit listed family-owned firms could either engage a big-4 audit firms or non-big-4. A firm’s audit tenure could either be short or long, while the audit assignment could be carried out jointly or otherwise. As a result, this study identified and reviewed a few auditors’ features capable of affecting timely release of annual reports of listed corporate entities, ditto family-owned firms. 2.1.1 Auditor’s type According to Afify (2009), large audit firms have a greater incentive to complete their audit work on schedule in order to maintain their brand and name. Furthermore, major audit firms often have more efficient audit teams because they have greater resources to undertake employee training and are able to deploy more powerful audit technologies that cut audit working time (Owusu & Leventis, 2006). As a result, it is expected that large audit firms (Big-4 firms) would complete audit exercise more quickly than small audit firms (non-Big-4 firms) even in a listed family-owned firm as confirmed by Rusmin and Evans (2017). Big-4 firms can complete audit work on time, because of their access to more resources, thereby lowering audit report timeliness. According to Huang, Wen, and Zhang (2020), Big-4 auditing firms play a significant stronger role in deterring managers from expropriating outsiders through cash resource; hence their professionalism is highly effective. Audit quality has improved as a result of strong incentive and monitoring within the Big– 4 firms (Che et al., 2020). However, confounding empirical submissions exist regarding the effect of auditor’s type on timeliness of financial reports (Alkhatib & Marji, 2012; Ismail et al., 2012; Ishak et al., 2017) as Lee and Jahng (2008) confirmed negative relationship between Big-4 audit firms and audit report lag. 2.1.2 Audit opinion An unqualified audit opinion indicates that the organization has good management and an internal control system, which reduces the time necessary for the audit process and processes (Soltani, 2002). Qualified opinions are unlikely to be granted until the auditor has spent significant time and effort executing further audit processes, according to Bamber et al. (1993). Furthermore, firms always interpret audit-qualified opinions negatively and may fail to reply to the auditor's request in Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 219 a timely manner. It is an indication of auditor-management dispute, which could lead to audit delays (Che-Ahmad & Abidin, 2008). According to Mulyadi and Budiawan (2018), auditors can issue five types of audit report opinions: unqualified opinion; modified unqualified opinion, qualified opinion, unfavourable opinion, and disclaimer opinion. An audit opinion is a report submitted by a public accountant based on his/her assessment of the fairness of the company's financial statements, as well as whether the financial statements are substantively presented. But, extant study has documented positive effect of audit opinion on audit report lag (Arifuddin & Usman, (2017), while Lee and Jahng (2008) recorded negative effect of audit opinion on audit report lag. This suggests confounding submission regarding the effect of audit opinion on audit report lag. 2.1.3 Audit fee Audit fee is the monetary compensation received by a firm’s external auditor for performing an audit task. Audit costs can vary greatly amongst audit companies, based on the complexity of the services, risk assessment, audit firm cost structure, required degree of competence, and other professional concerns (Isah & Muhammad, 2019). In comparison to paying a lower amount for audit fees, the larger the amount paid for audit fees, the more professional auditing services the auditors deliver to their clients (Ado et al., 2020). According to Ugwunta et al. (2018), large audit firm charges higher audit fees that correspond to their wealth status and minimize their clients’ exposure to litigation. Certain factors are considered when determining audit fee. Companies that report high level of profits will face extensive audit testing of their revenues and expenses, resulting in higher audit fees. The amount of audit fees that a client firm pays to its audit firm should, in theory, reflect the level of audit workload that the latter must accomplish during the auditing process. The auditor's assessment of the process’s complexity and the desired level of risk determine this level of work. According to Hussin et al. (2018), audit workload extends audit report lag which could lead to rise in audit fees. However, Lai (2022) found negative effect of audit fees on audit report lag, presupposing that amount received by the auditor has propensity to drive audit report lag. 2.1.4 Auditor’s tenure Tenure is the amount of time that an auditor is permitted to carry out an audit exercise in sequential order (Ilechukwu, 2017). According to Haron et al. (2009), audit tenure is the agreed-upon length of employment between the auditor and the client. According to Haron et al. (2009), audit tenure is the agreed-upon length of employment between the auditor and the client. The length of time between Accounting and Management Information Systems 220 Vol. 23, No. 1 auditor-client relationships is also known as auditors’ tenure, and it is thought to affect firm performance. In other words, audit firm’s tenure refers to how long auditors have served their clients (Urhoghide & Izedonmi, 2015). According to the literature, an audit contract with a term of up to three years is considered long-term, while one with a term of fewer than three years is considered short-term (Ilaboya, Izevbekhai & Ohiokha, 2014; Rahmina & Agoes, 2014; Oladipupo & MonyeEmina, 2016; Onaolapo et al., 2017). The hypothesis is that the length of time the external auditor’s relationship with the client lasts may result in a decrease in audit quality (Qawqzeh, et al., 2018). Extant study has noted that audit report lag is influenced by audit tenure (Lee & Masulis, 2009). Conversely, Dao and Pham (2014) found no relationship between audit reports lag and audit tenure. 2.1.5 Joint audit Joint audits entail appointing two (or more) audit firms to share responsibility for a single audit engagement and the creation of a single audit report. Collaborative audits often include collaborative planning, joint fieldwork, and a cross-review of each firm’s work by the other. The audit firms collaborate in reporting to the audit committee and are both parties to the audit report. Okaro et al. (2018) investigated the benefits and costs of compulsory joint audits in Nigeria and discovered minimal agreement among stakeholders on the desirability of mandated joint audits, emphasizing that the benefits outweigh the costs. Joint Audit indicate high level of expertise that is being exercised in carrying out the audit assignment; which could either result to a decrease or increase in audit report lag. Whereas, Ezat (2015) reported negative connect between audit report lag and joint audit practice. 2.2 Timeliness The primary goal of financial reporting is to give information about an entity's financial situation, performance, and cash flow that is relevant for decision-making by end users of financial statements, and the financial report also indicates the results of management's accountability. The information in the financial statements must meet two qualitative criteria: fundamental and improving qualitative features. Relevance and precise representation are fundamental qualitative features, while comparability, verifiability, timeliness, and understandability are enhanced fundamental qualitative criteria. The timely issuance of financial statement is essential; as a result it will influence the decision making of the financial statements’ users. If a company publishes its financial statements on time, the reliability and relevance of the information in its financial statements will be preserved; conversely, if the company publishes its financial statements late, the reliability and relevance of the information in its financial statements will be diminished Academic study has demonstrated the Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 221 importance of financial reporting timeliness in relation to many variables such as audit fee, audit duration, joint audit, firm size, auditor type, profitability, and leverage, among others. The audit report lag, which quantifies the time between the balance sheet date and the day the external auditor signs the financial statements, has been commonly used as a proxy for timeliness. 2.3 Theoretical review 2.3.1 Agency theory An agency relationship is defined by Jensen and Meckling (1976) as a contract in which one or more individuals known as the principal(s) engage another person known as the agent to undertake some management services on their behalf, including delegating some decision-making authority to the agent. The agency theory is concerned with the contractual relationship between management and shareholders, in which the shareholders, as the owners, transfer responsibilities to the manager to ensure the smooth operation of the business. Agents have more information than principals in agency theory, and this scenario of information asymmetry hampers the principals' ability to assess whether or not their interests are being appropriately served. The audit function emerges as a result of the separation of firm ownership from management. According to agency theory, audit quality is an effective monitoring mechanism that aids in detecting manager manipulation and aligning shareholders’ and managers’ interests. Agency theory recognizes auditing as one of the primary monitoring and controlling technique for regulating conflicts of interest and reducing agency costs (Adeyemi & Fagbemi, 2010). The agency theory is relevant in this study to determine the impact of audit characteristics on the financial timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. 2.3.2 Stakeholder theory In 1984, Freeman originally explained the stakeholder theory of organizational management and business ethics that addresses morals and values in managing an organization. A functional business is expected to serve various needs of its stakeholders and company is expected to provide a timely financial statement so that various stakeholders could make an informed decision. The stakeholders’ theory identifies different stakeholders apart from shareholders and management including employees, creditors, suppliers, researchers, members of the general public, regulators, and tax authorities. However, various stakeholders need the financial statement of the organization to make an informed decision; delay in presentation of financial statements can deprive them of making such Accounting and Management Information Systems 222 Vol. 23, No. 1 decision as at when needed. And, auditor’s characteristics have been identified as some of the factors that could reduce to delay in the presentation of the financial statement. Overtly, both theories are relevant, however, as stated earlier, the paper relied more on Agency theory. Drawing from the above theoretical basis, this study hypothesized thus; H0: There is no significant effect of auditors’ characteristics on timeliness of financial reports of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. 2.4 Empirical review The effects of auditors’ characteristics on financial report timeliness have been extensively researched, resulting in a lively debate in the financial or accounting literature. Some of the findings of extant studies on the effect (or relationship between) auditor characteristics on (and) timeliness that have been conducted both locally and internationally are reviewed below. The findings of Nelson and Shukeri (2011) concerning the effect of corporate governance on audit report timeliness of 703 Malaysian listed companies revealed that timely audit report is influenced by auditor type and audit opinion. This is in tandem with the empirical finding of Harindahyani and Harindahyani (2018) and Ocak and Zden (2018) on audit opinion. On the contrary, Alkhatib and Marji, (2012) and Ismail et al., (2012) noted that auditor type is negatively related to timeliness of financial statement based on data obtained from 137 Jordanian and 636 Bursa Malaysia’s main board listed firms respectively, and is consistent with Güleç (2017). But, Abdillah et al. (2019) recorded no significant influence of auditor type. Moreover, empirical investigation by Ishak et al., (2017) from Nigerian reporting environment on audit quality also corroborate that of Alkhatib and Marji, (2012) and Ismail et al., (2012). These conflicting findings is a pointer that governance structure impound mixed influence on timeliness of corporate reporting, depending on the reporting environment and sector. Thus, auditor type and opinion are potential determinants of timeliness of family-owned listed firms. The findings are not largely different from the empirical submission of Ezat, (2015) who recorded that audit tenure, audit fee, and joint audit tend to increase the delay in audit report lag among the sampled companies, consistent with Sengers (2017) and Singer and Zhang (2018) who recorded positive and significant influence of audit tenure on timeliness contrary to the finding by Ishak et al. (2017). However, Abdillah et al. (2019) and Yahaya and Awen (2021) obtained no significant effect of audit tenure on timeliness. An obvious deduction from the position of extant studies is that timeliness could be driven by audit tenure, audit fees and joint audit and confounding empirical submission in this regard exist. Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 229 Furthermore, audit opinion (AUDO) has coefficient of 85.74 and t-value of -2.61; this result align with the position of Nelson and Shuker (2011), Mukhtaruddin et al.(2015), and Harindahyani and Harindahyani’s (2018) findings. This shows that audit opinion extends timeliness of the listed firms’ financial report contrary to the assumptions of stakeholders’ theory. Audit tenure (AUDT) also reveals positive effect on timeliness of the financial report of the firm with a co-efficient of 19.89 and t-value of 2.34. This explains that increase in, or longer auditor’s tenure does not support timeliness of financial statement among the family-owned listed firms in Nigeria. This result negates Nelson and Shuker’s (2011) and Yahaya and Awen’s (2021) findings; the result therefore, is at variance with the learning curve theory but in tandem with Singer and Zhang’s (2018) submission. Hence, issuance of the financial report is not timely. Further, audit fee (AFEE) have a negative effect on the timeliness of the financial statement of the family-owned listed firms with a co-efficient of -16.84 and t-value of -2.17. This implies that audit fee is a driver of timely financial report among Nigerian listed family-owned firms. Thus, higher audit fee presents capability to encourage external auditors to issue timely audited financial report. This also suggests that audit fee helps to ameliorate agency cost and enhance stakeholders’ theory. Succinctly, only audit opinion, audit tenure and fee present statistical significant effect on timeliness. Therefore, since the model’s F-stat is significant and three out of the five tested predictors present significant t-stat, the null hypothesis cannot be upheld, hence, auditors’ characteristics impound significant effect on timelines of the Nigerian family-owned firms in Nigeria. Table 7. Regression estimate (Fixed Effect) (Random Effect) (PCSE) SIZE -511.6** -77.00 -67.33* (-2.83) (-1.27) (-2.31) ATYP -32.25 19.30 23.89* (-0.40) (0.36) (2.46) JOTA -60.37 -4.902 1.037 (-0.31) (-0.04) (0.03) AUDO 3.780 94.18 98.52* (0.03) (1.26) (2.47) AUDT -30.77 -4.134 -3.173 (-0.64) (-0.09) (-0.07) AFEE 9.594** 1.726 1.446 (2.67) (1.03) (0.88) _CONS 3149.7** 523.0 468.7 (2.69) (1.51) (1.62) R2 0.028 0.0092 0.211 f-value 1.70 4.47 15.40 P(f-value) 0.1194 0.6138 0.0173 Breusch and 0.16(p>0.05) . . Accounting and Management Information Systems 230 Vol. 23, No. 1 (Fixed Effect) (Random Effect) (PCSE) Pagan Lagrangian multiplier test Hausman test 9.89(p>0.05) Heteroscedasticity 2.0e+06(p<0.05) Autocorrelation test 2.790(p>0.05) f-value P(f-value) t statistics in parentheses *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01, ***p< 0.001 Thus, firm size play significant role in the effect of auditor’s characteristics on timeliness of listed family-owned in Nigeria. When the control variable was introduced, the explanatory power increased from 10.1% to 21.1% as presented in Table 7. This implied that firm size demonstrates significant controlling power in the effect of auditor’s characteristics on timeliness of family-owned listed firms in Nigeria. As such, future studies should take cognisance of this, while audit firms should pay more attention to the client’s size in the build-up for audit exercise towards attaining timeliness of audit functions. It was also noted that firm size reduces timeliness of the financial report with coefficient of -67.33 and t-value of - 2.31. This indicates that big firms will likely experience issuance of financial reports earlier than small firms contrary to expected thought that the more the size of a firm, the longer time it takes to complete its audit tasks. 4.3 Cross-sectional analysis In order to showcase the behaviour of the parameters across sections, crosssectional analyses conducted were performed and the results are presented in Table 8. A succinct deduction from the results is that auditor characteristics present the highest explanatory power (adj. R2 = 42%) over timeliness among family-owned listed firms in Nigeria in 2015 when control variable was not included in the model, and the model was found statistically significant. However, when the control variable was included, the highest explanatory power occurred in the same year 2015 among the firms, but declined slightly to 41%. Generally, about half of the cross-sectional analyses did not present statistical significant model results. This suggests that across sections, there was presence of endogeneity problem. Nevertheless, the combined parameters did not present progressive or retrogressive explanatory power over timeliness from 2012 to 2021, rather, it crisscrossed throughout the period, with or without control variable. But, no known related extant finding was found to compare our finding with in this regard. Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 231 Table 8. Cross-sectional analysis of the variables 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Model without control variable C 40.30 (0.513) 107.1 (1.051) 141.4 (0.840) 69.52 (0.618) 218.8* (1.912) 203.3*** (2.813) 174.4*** (3.057) 119.1 (1.760) 252.2** (2.30) 104.0** (2.431) ARTP 9.962 (0.308) -1.837 (-0.06) -48.43 (-0.931) -37.35 (-1.071) -12.08 (-0.47) 75.01*** (2.850) 27.08 (1.206) 0.449 (0.019) 9.51 (0.265) 26.6 (1.610) AUDO 86.27** (2.196) -4.253 (-0.12) 263.6 (3.030) 397.7 (5.870) 94.20 (1.190) 78.55** (2.578) 19.84 (0.761) 59.25** (2.402) 3.19 (0.017) -2.27 (-0.124) AUDT 63.37*** (3.248) 7.318 (0.345) 5.284 (0.080) -12.08 (-0.353) 17.50 (0.756) 2.963 (0.121) -7.839 (-0.44) -10.06 (0.499) 26.41 (0.865) 3.55 (0.297) JOTA -53.32** (-2.586) -44.35 (-1.28) -10.57 (-0.072) -28.04 (-0.285) 2.887 (0.064) -0.913 (-0.017) -15.21 (0.372) -43.76 (1.103) -28.29 (0.333) 1.61 (0.052) AFEE 10.83 (0.467) 2.978 (0.107) -1.807 (-0.045) 12.46 (0.463) -31.79 (-1.13) -32.45 (-1.650) -19.60 (-1.24) -0.994 (0.055) -39.34 (1.452) -7.89 (-0.735) R2 0.270 0.011 0.230 0.492 0.191 0.245 0.086 0.207 0.129 0.121 Adj R2 0.162 -0.130 0.126 0.423 0.079 0.143 -0.038 0.096 0.005 -0.061 F-Stat 2.513** 0.077 2.210* 7.161*** 3.00** 2.398* 0.696 1.876 1.044 0.666 p-val 0.049 0.995 0.074 0.000 0.022 0.056 0.630 0.123 0.408 0.653 Model with control variable C 76.08 (1.011) 91.35 (0.781) -20.88 (-0.109) 45.47 (0.358) 134.4 (1.281) 247.4** (2.536) 164.8** (2.381) 106.4 (1.391) 211.8 (1.523) 123.5** (2.278) ATYP 0.076 (0.002) 0.458 (0.014) -27.72 (-0.530) -31.35 (-0.825) -1.067 (-0.04) 67.15** (2.212) 29.12 (1.205) 2.758 (0.113) 10.6 (0.292) 24.22 (1.408) AUDO 80.83* (1.906) -0.547 (-0.02) 312.9*** (3.479) 400.4*** (5.818) 105.4 (1.345) 71.13** (2.064) 21.04 (0.784) 59.24 (2.372) 2.85 (0.064) -0.715 (0.040) AUDT 64.81*** (3.140) 4.599 (0.189) -19.64 (-0.296) -15.87 (-0.444) 20.30 (0.866) 3.204 (0.121) -7.997 (-0.440) -9.232 (-0.45) 32.6 (0.976) 0.647 (0.049) JOTA -51.19** (-2.545) -46.99 (-1.27) -30.53 (-0.213) -30.50 (-0.306) -11.97 (-0.26) 2.603 (0.046) -15.39 (-0.372) -43.96 (-1.09) -34.3 (-0.396) 3.003 (0.096) AFEE 47.49 (0.675) -10.40 (-0.21) -146.4 (-1.538) -15.46 (-0.217) -94.98 (-1.31) 6.409 (0.116) -28.82 (-0.716) -13.80 (0.356) -66.4 (-1.062) 3.865 (0.172) FSIZE -25.35 (-0.642) 10.02 (0.330) 107.2 (1.673) 19.51 (0.424) 47.23 (1.125) -27.96 (-0.759) 6.517 (0.250) 8.935 (0.375) 20.5 (0.481) -9.021 (-0.599) R2 0.280 0.013 0.286 0.494 0.219 0.257 0.088 0.210 0.135 0.135 Adj R2 0.149 -0.161 0.167 0.410 0.084 0.133 -0.065 0.074 -0.017 -0.09 F-Stat 2.140* 0.073 2.398** 5.865*** 1.631 2.071* 0.576 1.549 0.890 0.599 p-val 0.075 0.998 0.047 0.000 0.168 0.081 0.747 0.191 0.513 0.727 NOTE: ***,**,* imply significant a 0.01, 0.05 & 0.1 level respectively; t-stat in parenthesis. 5. Conclusion This study has achieved its objective of assessing the effect of auditor’s type, audit fee, audit tenure, audit opinion and joint audit on timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria. Concisely, the findings reveals that auditor type, audit tenure and audit opinion impound positive effect on timeliness of family-owned listed firms in Nigeria, but this positive effect is statistically insignificant for auditor type, especially when size of the firms was not put into consideration. This implies that auditor type, audit tenure and audit opinion have the potential to elongate timeliness of the examined listed firms. However, both joint audit exercise and audit fees demonstrate antithetic effect on timeliness among the listed firms. This also implies that joint audit and amount paid as audit fees accelerate timely release of these listed firms’ financial reports. Furthermore, when size of the clients’ firms Accounting and Management Information Systems 232 Vol. 23, No. 1 was included in the model, only audit tenure impounds inverse effect on timeliness, but statistically insignificant, while auditor type became significant. This has implications for the audit firms. In addition, size of the family-owned listed firms in Nigeria depicts negative effect on timeliness and also plays a significant role in the effect of auditor’s characteristics on timeliness of financial reports. The study therefore concludes that auditor type, audit tenure, and audit opinion extend or prolong issuance of family-owned listed firms’ financial reports in Nigeria, but only significant for audit tenure, while audit fee reduces timeliness, but statistically insignificant. The conclusion of this study, based on the context, is not in isolation of extant studies as it is consistent with that of Harindahyani and Harindahyani (2018), Ocak and Zden (2018), and Singer and Zhang (2018) conducted from another economies, but with focus on other sectors. However, our conclusion is at variance with the one by Ishak et al., (2017) who obtained negative nexus between auditor type and timeliness of financial statement, and that of Abdillah et al. (2019) and Yahaya and Awen (2021) with a conclusion that audit tenure and auditor industry do not have significant impact on audit report lag. It is also noted that firm size plays significant role in the effect of auditor’s characteristics on timeliness of financial report. The study recommends that listed family-owned firms in Nigeria and similar emerging markets should engage external auditors for longer audit tenure, so as to enhance the timeliness of their financial statements. In addition, audit fees paid by the family-owned listed firms to audit their firms should be such that support accelerated audit exercise in order for the financial reports to be issued without delay. Outcome of the study also suggests that further empirical investigation that focus on family-owned listed firms in both developed and developing economies be conducted. This becomes expedient in order to expand literature in the research area. The study equally recommends inclusion of more control variables in future studies on this topic. However, the limitations of the study centre on its focus on listed family-owned firms in Nigeria and the attention on auditors’ characteristics only, without capturing board and audit committees’ features, among others. These shortcomings are not expected to have any significant drawbacks on the results and findings of the study. References Abdillah, M.R., Mardijuwono, A.W., & Habiburrochman, H. (2019) “The effect of company characteristics and auditor characteristics on audit report lag”, Asian Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 7(4): 32-34. Adeyemi, S.B., & Fagbemi, T.O. (2010) “Audit quality, corporate governance and firm characteristics in Nigeria”, International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 5(5): 169-179. Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 233 Ado, A.B., Rashid, N., Mustapha, U.A., & Ademola, L.S. (2020) “The impact of audit quality on the financial performance of listed companies Nigeria”, Journal of Critical Reviews, vol. 7(9): 37-42. Afify, H.A.E. (2009) “Determinants of audit report lag: Does implementing corporate Governance have any impact? Empirical evidence from Egypt”, Journal of Applied Accounting Research, vol. 3(3): 12-17. Ahmed, M.I., & Che-Ahmad, A. (2016) “Effects of corporate governance characteristics on Audit report lags”, International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, vol. 6(7): 159-164. Alabi, A., Issa, S. O., & Usman, M. K. (2021) “Ownership structure and financial reporting timeliness of listed Insurance companies in Nigeria”, Global Journal of Accounting, vol. 7(2): 112-124. Alhassan, I., & Anwarul Islam, K.M. (2019) “The impact of environmental and social disclosures on the financial performance of oil and gas companies in Nigeria”, The Millennium University Journal, vol. 4(1): 33-44. Alkhatib, K., & Marji, Q. (2012) “Audit reports timeliness: Empirical evidence from Jordan”, Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, vol. 62: 1342-1349. Arifuddin, K.H., & Usman, A. (2017). Company size, profitability, and auditor opinion influence to audit report lag on registered manufacturing company in Indonesia Stock Exchange. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, vol. 15(19): 353-367. Atanda, F. A., Osemene, O. F., & Fanimokun, I. (2023) “Board characteristics and financial report timeliness in the Nigerian financial sector: A dynamic panel data analysis”, International Journal of Economic Behavior (IJEB), vol. 13(1): 5-32. Bamber, E.M., Bamber, L.S., & Schoderbek, M.P. (1993) “Audit structure and other Determinants of audit report lag: An empirical analysis”, Auditing, vol. 12(1): 1-7. Che, L., Hope, O.K., & Langli, J.C. (2020) “How big-4 firms improve audit quality”, Management Science, vol. 66(10): 4552-4572. Che-Ahmad, A., & Abidin, S. (2008) “Audit delay of listed companies: A case of Malaysia” International Business Research, vol. 1(4): 32-39. Cherif, Z. F., Ayadi, S. D., & Hamad, S. B. B. (2020) “The effect of family ownership on accrualbased and real activities based earnings management: Evidence from the French context”, Accounting and Management Information Systems, vol. 19(2): 283-310. Dao, M., & Pham, T. (2014) “Audit tenure, auditor specialization and audit report lag”, Managerial Auditing Journal, vol. 29(6): 490-512. Ezat, A.N. (2015) “The impact of audit-related factors on audit report lag for the Egyptian listed non-financial companies”, Journal of the Faculty of Commerce for Scientific Research, vol. 52(2): 1-39. Güleç, Ö. F. (2017) “Timeliness of corporate reporting in developing economies: Evidence from Turkey”, Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, vol. 16(3): 219-239. Accounting and Management Information Systems 234 Vol. 23, No. 1 Haron, H., Hartadi, B., Ansari, M. A., & Ismail, I. (2009) “Factors influencing auditors’ going Concern opinion”, Asian Academy of Management Journal, vol. 14(1): 1-19. Harindahyani, D., & Harindahyani, S. (2018) “The Effect of corporate governance on audit report timeliness in Indonesia. Journal Akuntansi Bisnis, vol. 16(1): 2541, 5204. Hussin, W.N., Bamahros H.M., & Shukeri S.N (2018) “Lead engagement partner workload, partner-client tenure and audit reporting lag: Evidence from Malaysia”, Managerial Auditing Journal, ol. 33(3): 246-266. Ilaboya, O.J., Izevbekhai, M.O., & Ohiokha, G. (2017) “Determinants of abnormal audit fees In Nigerian quoted companies”, Ekonomskamisao I praksa, vol. 1: 65-83. Ilechukwu, F. U. (2017) “Effect of audit fee on audit quality of listed firms in Nigeria”, International Journal of Trend in Research and Development, vol. 4(5): 319-326. Huang, P., Wen, Y. C., & Zhang, Y. (2020) “Does the monitoring effect of Big 4 audit firms really prevail? Evidence from managerial expropriation of cash assets”, Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, vol. 55: 739-768. Isah, A. I., & Muhammad, L. (2019) “Impact of audit quality on the financial performance of Listed Deposit Money Banks in Nigeria”, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 18(1): 141-157. Ishak, R., Amran, N.A., & Manaf, K.B.A. (2017) “The Compliance Level amongst Malaysian Listed Companies towards Corporate Governance Index”, International Journal of Economic Research, vol. 14: 209-22. Ismail, H., Mustapha, M., & Cho, O.M. (2012) “Timeliness of audited financial reports of Malaysian listed companies”, International Journal of Business and Social Science, vol. 3(22): 242-247. Jensen, M.C., & Meckling, W.H. (1976) “Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs, and ownership structure”, Journal of financial economics, vol. 3(4): 305-360. Jerry, M., & Saidu, S.A. (2017) “The impact of audit firm size on financial reporting quality of listed insurance companies in Nigeria”, Iranian Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, vol. 2(1): 19-47. Kantudu, A. S., & Alhassan, I. (2022) “Audit committee and financial reporting quality in listed nonfinancial firms in Nigeria”, Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review (Kuwait Chapter), vol. 11(1): 6-14. Lai, K. W. (2023) “Differential spill over effects of different non-audit fees on audit report lag”, Journal of Applied Accounting Research, vol. 24(1): 1-24. Lee, G., & Masulis, R.W. (2009) “Seasoned equity offerings: Quality of accounting information and expected flotation costs”, Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 92(3): 443-469. Lee, H., & Jahng, G. (2008) “Determinants of audit report lag: Evidence from Korea-an examination of auditor-related factors”, Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), vol. 24(2): 27-44. Auditors’ characteristics and timeliness of listed family-owned firms in Nigeria Vol. 23, No. 1 235 Mouna, A., & Anis, J (2013) “Financial reporting delay and investors’ behaviour: Evidence from Tunisia”, International Journal of Management and Business Research, vol. 3(1): 57-67. Mukhtaruddin, M., Oktarina, R., Relasari, R., & Abukosim, A. (2015) “Firm and auditor characteristics, and audit report lag in manufacturing companies listed on Indonesia Stock Exchange during 2008-2012”, Expert Journal of Business and Management, vol. 3(1): 13-26. Mulyadi, M.S., & Budiawan, S. (2018) “Analysis of going concern modified audit report in Indonesia and Singapore”, International Journal of Business and Globalisation, vol. 20(1): 120-127. Nelson, S.P., & Shukeri, S.N. (2011) “Corporate governance and audit report timeliness: Evidence from Malaysia”, Research in Accounting in Emerging Economics, vol. 11: 109-127. Ocak, M., & Özden, E. (2018) “Signing auditor-specific characteristics and audit report lag: A Research from Turkey”, Journal of Applied Business Research, vol. 34(2): 277-294. Okaro, S.C, Okafor, G.O, Ofoegbu, G.N (2018) “Mandating joint audits in Nigeria: Perspectives and issues”, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 8(3): 316-338. Oladipupo, A.O., & Monye-Emina, H.E. (2016) “Do abnormal audit fees matter in the Nigerian audit market”? International Journal of Business and Finance Management Research, vol. 4(6): 64-73. Ologun, O. V., Isenmila, P. A., Omokhudu, O., & Alade, M. E. (2020). “IFRS adoption, corporate governance and timeliness of financial reports among Nigerian listed firms”, Accounting and Taxation Review, vol. 4(2): 33-56. Onaolapo, A.R., Ajulo, O.B., & Onifade, H.O. (2017) “Impact of Audit Fees on Audit Quality: Evidence from Cement Manufacturing Companies in Nigeria”, Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 5(1): 157-185. Owusu-Ansah, S., & Leventis, S. (2006) “Timeliness of corporate annual financial reporting in Greece”, European Accounting Review, vol. 15(2): 273-287. Qawqzeh, H.K., Endut, W.A., Rashid, N., Johari, R.J., Hamid, N.A., & Rasit, Z.A. (2018) “Auditor tenure, audit firm rotation and audit quality: A literature review”, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 8(12): 1314-1324. Rahmina, L.Y., & Agoes, S. (2014) “Influence of auditor independence, audit tenure, and Audit fee on audit quality of members of capital market accountant forum in Indonesia”, Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, vol. 164: 324-331. Reheul, A.M., Van Caneghem, T., & Verbruggen, S. (2014) “Financial reporting lags in the non-profit sector: An empirical analysis Voluntas”, International Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organizations, vol. 25(2): 352-377. Rusmin, R., & Evans, J. (2017) “Audit quality and audit report lag: the case of Indonesian Listed companies”, Asian Review of Accounting, vol. 25(2): 191-210. Accounting and Management Information Systems 236 Vol. 23, No. 1 Singer, Z., & Zhang, J. (2018) “Auditor tenure and the timeliness of misstatement discovery”, The Accounting Review, vol. 93(2): 315-338. Sengers, T. (2017) “The effect of audit partner and firm tenure on audit quality”. A Master Thesis of the Radboud University. Retrieved from https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/server/api/core/bitstreams/2e3de26a-90f5-423b-a6d1f0c7e10e12b1/content Soltani, B. (2002) “Timeliness of corporate and audit reports: Some empirical evidence in the French context”, The International Journal of Accounting, vol. 37(2): 215-246. Sowande, S. (2017) “Nigeria family business barometer”, A Publication of Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler (KPMG), Nigeria. Retrieved from kpmg.com/org Türel, A. (2010) “Timeliness of financial reporting in emerging capital markets: Evidence from Turkey”, İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 39(2): 227-240. Ugwunta, D.O., Ugwuanyi, B. U., & Ngwa, C. U. (2018) “Effect of audit quality on the Market price of firms listed on the Nigerian stock market”, Journal of Accounting and Taxation, vol. 10(6): 61-70. Urhoghide, R.O. & Izedonmi, F.O.I. (2015) “An empirical investigation of audit fee determinants in Nigeria”, International Journal of Business and Social Research, vol. 5(8): 48-58. Waris, M., & Haji Din, B. (2023) “Impact of corporate governance and ownership concentrations on timelines of financial reporting in Pakistan”, Cogent Business & Management, vol. 10(1), 1-19. Yahaya, O.A., & Awen, B.I. (2021) “Auditors’ type and quality of audit of resources companies in Nigeria”, Nigerian Journal of Accounting and Finance, vol. 13(1): 168-197.