CREATIVE ACCOUNTING AS A MANAGERIAL TOOL: STRATEGIC USE, RISKS, AND REGULATORY CHALLENGES
Keywords:
creative accounting, digital transformation, continuous auditing, audit analyticsAbstract
This paper examines how digital transformation reshapes creative accounting practices by simultaneously strengthening monitoring capacity and creating new opportunities for manipulation within increasingly automated financial reporting environments. The purpose is to synthesize contemporary academic and professional literature on the interaction between advanced data analytics, continuous auditing, enterprise information systems, and emerging “fraud windows” that arise from complexity, speed, and interconnectivity in digital accounting infrastructures. Methodologically, the study adopts a structured literature review approach. The reviewed evidence indicates three main results: first, the diffusion of integrated enterprise resource planning systems, electronic invoicing, and platform-based workflows expands transaction traceability, thereby improving anomaly detection and strengthening the evidentiary base for assurance; second, organizations increasingly deploy audit analytics and continuous auditing techniques that shift assurance from periodic sampling to more frequent, risk-oriented testing, which can reduce traditional accrual-based manipulation that depends on low visibility and limited verification; third, despite these advances, digital transformation generates new risk channels, including manipulation of master data, exploitation of access controls and privileged accounts, automated posting rules that embed biased assumptions, intentional segmentation of transactions across systems, and governance gaps in algorithmic decision processes. In combination, these mechanisms suggest that creative accounting is not eliminated but rather reconfigured, with opportunistic actors moving from overt journal entry adjustments toward subtler forms of data and process manipulation that may evade conventional audit routines if information technology governance is weak. The conclusions emphasize that technology is an ambiguous control instrument: it enhances transparency when well governed, yet heightens vulnerability when accountability, segregation of duties, and model oversight lag behind system sophistication. Recommendations propose strengthening information technology general controls, instituting robust data governance and audit trails for master data changes, expanding auditor competencies in information systems and analytics, and aligning continuous auditing with clear escalation protocols and human review to mitigate automation bias.
References
Appelbaum, D., Kogan, A., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2017). Big Data and Analytics in the Modern Audit Engagement: Research Needs. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-51684
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2024). Occupational fraud 2024: A report to the nations. ACFE.
Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2020). Technology—Audit documentation (Non-authoritative support material). AUASB.
Chan, D. Y., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2011). Innovation and practice of continuous auditing. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 12(2), 152–160.
Cao, T.; Duh, R.R.; Tan, H.T.; Xu, T. Enhancing Auditors’ Reliance on Data Analytics Under Inspection Risk Using Fixed and Growth Mindsets. Account. Rev. 2022, 97, 131–153
Chiu, V., Liu, Q., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2014). The development and intellectual structure of continuous auditing research. Journal of Accounting Literature, 33(1), 37–57. 10.1016/j.acclit.2014.08.001.
Hardy, C. A., & Laslett, G. (2015). Continuous auditing and monitoring in practice: Lessons from Metcash’s Business Assurance Group. Journal of Information Systems. 29 (2): 183–194. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-50969
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. (2016). Exploring the growing use of technology in the audit, with a focus on data analytics. IAASB.
Lee, H., Zhang, L., Liu, Q., & Vasarhelyi, M. (2022). Text Visual Analysis in Auditing: Data Analytics for Journal Entries Testing. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 46, Article 100571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2022.100571.
Sanoran, K., & Ruangprapun, J. (2023). Initial Implementation of Data Analytics and Audit Process Management. Sustainability, 15(3), 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15031766
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222.
Wang, W., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2024). The application of continuous audit and monitoring methodology: A government medication procurement case. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 55, 100713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2024.100713.
