This study examines the effects of a joint audit on auditor’s report consensus and accuracy. We
investigate whether a joint audit, particularly the report issued, improves an audit’s quality. We
measure the audit’s quality using the degree of auditor consensus in the auditor’s report. We
also use an expected opinion, which we believe is appropriate in the defined circumstances, as
a scale for the measurement of the report’s accuracy. Participants in the study were statutory
auditors from Austria and Germany. At present, manners of improving audit quality and auditing
decisions are being intensively discussed in the European Union and everywhere in the world.
The joint audit approach is a very current topic in this discussion. Regulators and standard
setters are extensively examining the benefits of various audit approaches. Nevertheless, in
most countries, the joint audit approach is still utilised on a voluntary basis and is not very
common. Our study provides evidence that auditors who use a joint audit approach achieve
higher consensus and greater accuracy. In light of current discussion on improving the quality
of audits by implementing new methods and regulations, these results are significant for both
auditing practice and audit research. Despite this importance, there are very few studies and
little research on improving quality through the use of a joint audit approach. Our results
demonstrate the need for further investigation of the determinants of audit performance when
using a joint audit approach. Using a case study research design and an interview, we draw
conclusions and discuss necessary future research.