The PCAOB inspections process over global network firms: synthesizing the perspective of former inspectors with prior research

Eldar Maksymov & Kimberly D. Westermann

Review of Accounting Studies2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-026-09941-8article
FT50AJG 4ABDC A*
Weight
0.37

Abstract

Calls for greater transparency in PCAOB inspections have intensified amid persistent concerns about opacity and inconsistency. We integrate prior academic research with in-depth interviews from 29 former PCAOB inspectors to construct a detailed, phase-based account of the inspection process over global network firms. We organize insights into four sequential phases—hiring, training, and performance assessment; planning; execution; and resolution—and present structured taxonomies that combine the literature with novel, practice-based observations. The paper’s primary contribution lies in organizing fragmented research and insider perspectives into a framework that clarifies how inspections operate in practice and where further research is critical. This synthesis provides a structured foundation for researchers, practitioners, and regulators seeking to evaluate and strengthen audit oversight—at a time when the structure and independence of the PCAOB itself faces renewed political scrutiny.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-026-09941-8

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{eldar2026,
  title        = {{The PCAOB inspections process over global network firms: synthesizing the perspective of former inspectors with prior research}},
  author       = {Eldar Maksymov & Kimberly D. Westermann},
  journal      = {Review of Accounting Studies},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-026-09941-8},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The PCAOB inspections process over global network firms: synthesizing the perspective of former inspectors with prior research

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.