Förväntningsgapet : Vad revisionsinsatsen i HQ Bank innebär för förväntningsgapet

Sammanfattning: Problem: That the stakeholder’s expectations don´t answer to what auditors can and may do have been a problem for several years. This problem was defined for the first time by Liggio at 1974. Since 1974 there have been several researches about the expectation gap for auditors. Purpose: The purpose of our study is to research what the audit effort in HQ Bank means for the expectation gap. Theory: The theories in our study discuss the audit profession, the definition of the expectation gap, how trust develops between individuals, the regulations that the authorities discuss and a review of earlier researches in this subject. Method: We have done a qualitative study in which we interviewed approved auditors at PwC and Convensia in addition we interviewed the chief lawyer at the Swedish financial supervisory authority to answer our purpose. Conclusions: The conclusion of our study is that the expectation gap exists between the auditors and the stakeholders. Another conclusion is that the incidents in HQ Bank have influenced the expectation gap in a negative direction, to reduce the expectation gap we suggest that adjustments of the regulations must be done and that the auditors themselves must inform their stakeholders what auditors can and may do.