• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Saran

Dalam dokumen Aji Mutthahari Morfi Nasution (Halaman 77-0)

BAB V : KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN

5.2 Saran

Penelitian mengenai pergantian KAP selanjutnya diharapkan mampu memberikan hasil yang lebih baik dan berkualitas, dengan mempertimbangkan saran berikut ini:

1. Penelitian selanjutnya mungkin dapat mempertimbangkan untuk menggunakan sektor industri yang lain sebagai populasi penelitian atau menambah sampel penelitian.

2. Variabel financial distress yang digunakan pada penelitian selanjutnya hendaknya diukur dengan lebih akurat, tidak dengan melihat rugibersih yang dialami perusahaan selama dua tahun berturut-turut. Peneliti berikutnya mungkin dapat menggunakan Altman Z-Score.

3. Peneliti selanjutnya diharapkan menambah variabel independen penelitian agar mampu menjelaskan masalah pergantian KAP dengan lebih baik lagi. Variabel independen yang dapat digunakan seperti biaya audit, pergantian komite audit, dan lain-lain.

DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Abbott Lawrence J, Young Park, Susan Parker. 2000. “The Effects of Audit Committee Activity and Independence on Corporate Fraud”

ManagerialFinance: Vol. 26, Iss. 11; pg. 55-68.

Ahmad, Rodoni dan Herni, Ali. Manajemen Keuangan. Penerbit Mitra Wacana Media, Jakarta, 2010.

Arens, Alvin A. Elder. Beasley. “Auditing”, Erlangga, Jakarta, 2006.

Bastian, Indra. Sistem Akuntansi Sektor Publik. Salemba Empat, Jakarta 2007.

Boynton, William C. Johnson., Raymond N. and Kell, Walter G. “Modern Auditing”, edisi ketujuh, jilid 2, Erlangga, Jakarta. 2001.

Carcello, J.V. dan Neal, T.L. “Audit Committee Characteristis and auditor Dismissals Following “New” Going-Concern Reports”, The AccountingReview, Vol. 78, No. 1, pp. 95-117, 2003.

Chadegani, AA., Zakiah MM., Azam Jari. “The Determinant Factors of Auditor switch among Companies Listed on Tehran Stock Exchange”, International Conference on Sociality and Economics Development IPEDR vol.10, 2011.

Damayanti, S. dan M. Sudarma. “Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Perusahaan Berpindah Kantor Akuntan Publik”, Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XI, Pontianak, 2008.

Elloumi, F. and Gueyie´, J.P. „„Financial distress and corporate governance: an empirical analysis’‟, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 15-23 Corporate Governance:

TheInternational Journal of Business in Society, 2001.

Fachrudin, Khaira Amalia. Kesulitan Keuangan Perusahaan dan Personal. Usu Press, Medan, 2008.

Febrianto, R. “Isu Metodologis Riset Pergantian (Wajib) Kantor Akuntan Publik dan Auditor dan Kualitas Audit”. Sleman, 2009. Diakses dari http://iddriset.blogspot.com/2009/05/isi-metodologis-riset-pergantian-wajib.html

Garson, David G. Hierarchical Linear Modeling, North Carolina State University:

SAGE Publications, Inc. 2012.

Ghozali, Imam, “Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS 19”, Edisi 5 Cetakan V, Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, 2011.

Hudaib, M, dan T.E Cooke. “The Impact of Managing Director Changes and Financial Distress on Audit Qualification and Auditor Switching”, Journalof Business Finance & Accounting, Vol.32, No.9-10, Pp.1703-39, 2005.

Hutabarat, Goodman. “Pengaruh Pengalaman Time Budget Pressure dan Etika Auditor terhadap Kualitas Audit”, Jurnal Ilmiah ESAI Volume 6, Nomor 1,2012

Indriantoro, Nur dan Bambang Supomo. “Metodologi Penelitian Bisnis”, BPFEYogyakarta, Yogyakarta, 2002.

Jensen, Michael C. dan Meckling W.H. “Theory of The Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Cost and ownership Structure”, Journal of financialEconomics, Vol. 3, h. 305-360, 1976.

Kadir, M.N. 1994. Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Perusahaan Berpindah KAP. Tesis Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.

Kawijaya, N. dan Juniarti. “Faktor-faktor yang Mendorong Perpindahan Auditor (Auditor Switch) pada Perusahaan-perusahaan di Surabaya dan Sidoarjo”, Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, Vol. 4, No. 2, November2002:93-105, 2002.

Maharani, Bunga dan Bambang Purnomosidhi. “Pergantian Auditor: Pengujian Teori yang Menghubungkan Biaya Agensi dengan Diferensiasi Kualitas Auditor”, Tesis Universitas Brawijaya, Malang, 2010.

Mardiyah, A.A. “Pengaruh Faktor Klien dan Faktor Auditor Terhadap Auditor Changes: Sebuah Pendekatan dengan Model Kontijensi RPA (Recursive Model Algorithm)”, Media Riset Akuntansi, Auditing, dan Informasi,Vol.3, No.2, pp.133-154, 2002.

Meisya, Anisa. “Pengaruh Diferensiasi Kualitas Audit, Kesulitan Keuangan Perusahaan dan Opini Audit Terhadap Pergantian Kantor Akuntan Publik”, Skripsi UIN Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta, 2013.

Menteri Keuangan. Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Republik Indonesia Nomor 17/PMK.01/2008 Pasal 3 tentang “Jasa Akuntan Publik”, Jakarta, 2008.

Menteri Keuangan. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 20/2015 Pasal 11 tentang “Praktik Akuntan Publik”, Jakarta, 2015.

Myers, J.N., Myers, L.A., dan Omer, T.C. “Exploring The Term of The Auditor Client Relationship and The Quality of Earnings: A Case for Mandatory Auditor Rotation?”. The Accounting Review, Vol. 78, No. 3, pp. 779-799,2003.

Nagy, Albert L. “Mandatory audit firm turnover, financial reporting quality, and client bargaining power: The case of Arthur Andersen.”

AccountingHorizons. Vol. 19(2): 51–68, 2005.

Nasser, et.al. “Auditor-Client Relationship: The Case of Audit tenure and Auditor Switching in Malaysia”. Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 21, No. 7, pp.724-737. 2006.

Praptitorini, Mirna Dyah dan Indira Januarti, 2007. Analisis Pengaruh Kualitas Audit, Debt Default, dan Opinion Shopping terhadap Penerimaan Opini Going Concern. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X. Makassar, 2007.

Schwartz, K.B. dan B.S. Soo. “An Analysis of Firm 8–K Disclousure of Auditor Changes by Firms Approaching Bankruptcy”, Auditing: A Journal ofPractice Theory, Vol. 14. No. 1, Spring 1995, 125-135, 1995.

Schwartz, K.B, dan K. Menon. “Auditor switches by failing firm”. The Accounting Review, Vol. LX, No. 2, pp 248-261. 1985.

Setyorini, T. N. dan A. Y. Ardiati. 2006. Pengaruh Potensi Kebangkrutan Perusahaan Publik terhadap Pergantian Auditor. Kinerja, Vol. 10, No. 1, p.

76-87

Sinarwati, Ni Kadek.”Mengapa Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di BEI Melakukan Pergantian Kantor Akuntan Publik?”. Simposium NasionalAkuntansi XIII, Purwokerto, 2010.

Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik, 2011.

Tandirerung, Y.T. “Wacana Baru Sistem Penunjukan Kantor Akuntan Publik Dalam Perspektif Teori Komunikasi Habermas”. Jurnal Eksis Vol. 8 No.2.

Agustus, Samarinda, 2012.

Tirapat, S., and A. Nittayagasetwat. ”An Investigation of Thai Listed Firms Financial Distress Using Macro and Micro Variables”.

MultinationalFinance Journal 3, 103-126, 1999.

Wijayani, Evi Dwi dan Indira Januarti. “Analisis Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Perusahaan di Indonesia Melakukan Auditor Switching.”Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XIV, Aceh, 2011.

LAMPIRAN I

DATA SAMPEL PERUSAHAAN MANUFAKTUR DI BURSA EFEK

INDONESIA PERIODE 2011-2015

No. Kode Nama Perusahaan 1. ADES Akasha Wira International Tbk 2. ALKA Alakasa Industrindo Tbk 3. AMFG Asahimas Flat Glass Tbk 4. AUTO Astra Otoparts Tbk

5. BIMA Primarindo Asia Infrastructure Tbk 6. BRAM Indo Kordsa Tbk

7. BRNA Berlina Tbk

8. BTON Betonjaya Manunggal Tbk 9. BUDI Budi Acid Jaya Tbk 10. CEKA Cahaya Kalbar Tbk 11. CLPI Colorpak Indonesia Tbk 12. DPNS Duta Pertiwi Nusantara Tbk 13. EKAD Ekadharma International Tbk 14. HDTX Panasia Indo Resources Tbk 15. IKAI Intikeramik Alamasri Industri Tbk 16. INAF Indofarma (Persero) Tbk

17. INAI Indal Aluminium Industry Tbk 18. JKSW Jakarta Kyoei Steel Works Tbk 19. JPRS Jaya Pari Steel Tbk

20. KAEF Kimia Farma (Persero) Tbk 21. KICI Kedaung Indah Can Tbk 22. KLBF Kalbe Farma Tbk

23. LION Lion Metal Works Tbk

24. LMPI Langgeng Makmur Industri Tbk 25. MRAT Mustika Ratu Tbk

26. MYOR Mayora Indah Tbk 27. PBRX Pan Brothers Tex Tbk

28. RMBA Bentoel Internasional Investama Tbk 29. ROTI Nippon Indosari Corpindo Tbk

30. SCPI Merck Sharp & Dohme Indonesia Tbk 31. SMCB Holcim Indonesia Tbk

32. SPMA Suparma Tbk

33. SRSN Indo Acidatama Tbk

34. SSTM Sunson Textile Manufacturer Tbk 35. TCID Mandom Indonesia Tbk

36. TIRA Tira Austenite Tbk

37. TIRT Tirta Mahakam Resources Tbk 38. TSPC Tempo Scan Pacific Tbk

39. ULTJ Ultra Jaya Milk Industry Tbk 40. UNIT Nusantara Inti Corpora Tbk 41. VOKS Voksel Electric Tbk

LAMPIRAN II

HASIL OUTPUT SPSS

GET

FILE='D:\data mentah 1.sav'.

DATASET NAME DataSet0 WINDOW=FRONT.

DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=OA PM RA FD LnTA PKAP /STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV VARIANCE MIN MAX.

Descriptives

Notes

Output Created 25-Dec-2016 23:41:30

Comments

Input Data D:\data mentah 1.sav

Active Dataset DataSet1

Definition of Missing User defined missing values are treated as missing.

Cases Used All non-missing data are used.

Syntax DESCRIPTIVES

VARIABLES=OA PM RA FD LnTA PKAP

/STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV VARIANCE MIN MAX.

Resources Processor Time 00:00:00.016

Elapsed Time 00:00:00.015

[DataSet1] D:\data mentah 1.sav

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Variance

OA 205 .00 1.00 .3854 .48787 .238

PM 205 .00 1.00 .1073 .31027 .096

RA 205 .00 1.00 .2683 .44416 .197

FD 205 .00 1.00 .3463 .47697 .227

LnTA 205 20,82 31,52 27,6584 1,50900 2.277

PKAP 205 .00 1.00 .1854 .38955 .152

Valid N (listwise) 205

LOGISTIC REGRESSION VARIABLES PKAP /METHOD=ENTER OA PM RA FD LnTA /CLASSPLOT

/CASEWISE OUTLIER(2) /PRINT=GOODFIT CORR ITER(1)

/CRITERIA=PIN(0.05) POUT(0.10) ITERATE(20) CUT(0.5).

Logistic Regression

Notes

Output Created 25-Dec-2016 23:42:11

Comments

Input Data D:\data mentah 1.sav

Active Dataset DataSet1

Missing Value Handling Definition of Missing User-defined missing values are treated as missing

Syntax LOGISTIC REGRESSION VARIABLES

PKAP

/METHOD=ENTER OA PM RA FD LnTA

/CLASSPLOT

/CASEWISE OUTLIER(2)

/PRINT=GOODFIT CORR ITER(1) /CRITERIA=PIN(0.05) POUT(0.10) ITERATE(20) CUT(0.5).

Resources Processor Time 00:00:00.047

Elapsed Time 00:00:00.031

[DataSet1] D:\data mentah 1.sav

Case Processing Summary

Unweighted Casesa N Percent

Selected Cases Included in

Analysis 205 100.0

Missing Cases 0 .0

Total 205 100.0

Unselected Cases 0 .0

Total 205 100.0

a. If weight is in effect, see classification table for the total number of cases.

Dependent Variable Encoding Origin

al

Value Internal Value

0 0

1 1

Block 0: Beginning Block

a. Constant is included in the model.

b. Initial -2 Log Likelihood: 196,568 c. Estimation terminated at iteration number 4 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001.

Classification Tablea,b

a. Constant is included in the model.

b. The cut value is ,500

Variables in the Equation

B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)

Step 0 Constant -1.480 .180 67.844 1 .000 .228

Variables not in the Equation

Score df Sig.

Step 0 Variables OA 14.627 1 .000

PM .002 1 .964

RA 8.519 1 .004

FD .666 1 .414

LnTA 7.327 1 .007

Overall Statistics 23.159 5 .000

Block 1: Method = Enter

Iteration Historya,b,c,d

Iteration

-2 Log likelihood

Coefficients

Constant OA PM RA FD

LnT A

Step 1 1 179.904 2.445 .780 .026 -.322 -.202 -.139

2 172.401 4.664 1.177 .156 -.673 -.284 -.235

3 171.754 5.450 1.283 .251 -.924 -.294 -.267

4 171.742 5.528 1.292 .265 -.981 -.294 -.270

5 171.742 5.529 1.292 .266 -.982 -.294 -.270

6 171.742 5.529 1.292 .266 -.982 -.294 -.270

a. Method: Enter

b. Constant is included in the model.

c. Initial -2 Log Likelihood: 196,568

d. Estimation terminated at iteration number 6 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001.

Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients Chi-square df Sig.

Step 1 Step 24.826 5 .000

Block 24.826 5 .000

Model 24.826 5 .000

Model Summary

a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 6 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001.

Hosmer and Lemeshow Test Step Chi-square df Sig.

1 10.665 8 .221

Contingency Table for Hosmer and Lemeshow Test

PKAP = ,00 PKAP = 1,00

Total Observed Expected Observed Expected

Step 1 1 20 20.419 1 .581 21

Classification Tablea

a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: OA, PM, RA, FD, LnTA.

Correlation Matrix

Step number: 1

Casewise Listb

b. Cases with studentized residuals greater than 2,000 are listed.

REGRESSION

/DESCRIPTIVES MEAN STDDEV CORR SIG N /MISSING LISTWISE

/STATISTICS COEFF OUTS BCOV R ANOVA /CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10)

/NOORIGIN

/DEPENDENT PKAP

/METHOD=ENTER OA PM RA FD LnTA /SCATTERPLOT=(PKAP ,*ADJPRED)

/RESIDUALS DURBIN HIST(ZRESID) NORM(ZRESID) /SAVE PRED RESID.

Regression

Notes

Output Created 25-Dec-2016 23:44:40

Comments

Input Data D:\data mentah 1.sav

Active Dataset DataSet1

Missing Value Handling Definition of Missing User-defined missing values are treated as missing.

Cases Used Statistics are based on cases with no missing values for any variable used.

Syntax REGRESSION

/DESCRIPTIVES MEAN STDDEV CORR SIG N /MISSING LISTWISE

/STATISTICS COEFF OUTS BCOV R ANOVA

Resources Processor Time 00:00:00.733

Elapsed Time 00:00:00.733

Memory Required 2796 bytes

Additional Memory Required for Residual Plots

880 bytes Variables Created or

Modified

PRE_4 Unstandardized Predicted Value

RES_4 Unstandardized Residual

[DataSet1] D:\data mentah 1.sav

Descriptive Statistics Mean Std. Deviation N

PKAP .1854 .38955 205

OA .3854 .48787 205

PM .1073 .31027 205

RA .2683 .44416 205

FD .3463 .47697 205

LnTA 27,6584 1,50900 205

Correlations

a. All requested variables entered.

b. Dependent Variable: PKAP

Model Summaryb

a. Predictors: (Constant), LnTA, OA, PM, FD, RA b. Dependent Variable: PKAP

a. Predictors: (Constant), LnTA, OA, PM, FD, RA b. Dependent Variable: PKAP

Coefficient Correlationsa

Adjusted Predicted Value -.0694 .4402 .1857 .13160 205

Residual -.42783 .99512 .00000 .36688 205

Std. Residual -1.152 2.679 .000 .988 205

Stud. Residual -1.168 2.728 .000 1.001 205

Deleted Residual -.44022 1.03188 -.00038 .37692 205

Stud. Deleted Residual -1.169 2.773 .003 1.007 205

Mahal. Distance 1.901 23.723 4.976 3.444 205

Cook's Distance .000 .056 .005 .009 205

Centered Leverage Value .009 .116 .024 .017 205

a. Dependent Variable: PKAP

Charts

Dalam dokumen Aji Mutthahari Morfi Nasution (Halaman 77-0)

Dokumen terkait