Carillion Collapse-Big Four accounting firms’ rhetorical strategies and repetitive slogans: The expectation gap continues beyond the boundary

This study attempts to offer insights into the auditing practices based on critical discourse analysis of persuasive strategies embedded in Big Four responses to public inquiries. Our conceptual framework is based on Aristotle’s three pillars of rhetorical proofs: “ethos”, “logos” and “pathos”. Findings of this study reveal how Big Four strategically use repetitive rhetoric slogans to shape optimistic future performance, which might be different from the feasible reality. They convey two impressions through their responses to public inquiry on Carillion failure: (i) their audit practices were good all through their engagement activities with Carillion, and (ii) they are not to blame for Carillion’s failure. Limitations: Subjectivity remains inherent in interpreting the findings of this study. Future studies may adopt or adapt our analytical framework to examine other domains underpinning auditing practices.Practical implications: Results of this study have managerial implications for policy makers, regulatory bodies and other stakeholders.