Affiliation:
1. Rider University
2. Drexel University
3. The University of Alabama
Abstract
Auditors face the challenging tasks of attesting that the financial statements are free from material misstatement while simultaneously fostering a functional working relationship with the client. As the financial statements may be considered, in part, a product of negotiations between the auditor and client management (Antle and Nalebuff 1991), the negotiation strategy employed by the auditor may be useful in effectively fulfilling both tasks. To investigate the effect of auditor strategy on the resolution of proposed audit adjustments in a post Sarbanes-Oxley environment, we conduct experiments that examine both the client and auditor sides of the negotiation. We investigate a strategy of “concession” that draws upon the societal rule of reciprocation, which makes the waiving of inconsequential audit differences transparent. Specifically, with a concession approach, the auditor brings to the attention of the client all the audit differences (both significant and inconsequential) discovered during the audit and, subsequently, waives the inconsequential items. In contrast, a strategy of “no-concession” of inconsequential items (in which the auditor discloses to the client only the significant audit differences that must be booked) renders the client unaware of the waived inconsequential differences. Results from the client experiments indicate that, relative to a no-concession approach, participants representing client management (controllers/CFOs) are more willing to post significant income-decreasing adjustments (both objective and subjective) when exposed to a concession approach in the course of negotiating the final contents of the audited financial statements. A concession approach also results in greater client satisfaction and retention. Consistent with these findings, results from the auditor experiment suggest that auditors also perceive that altering their approach toward greater disclosure of waived inconsequential audit differences can improve client satisfaction and retention.
Publisher
American Accounting Association
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Finance,Accounting
Reference62 articles.
1. Accounting Today. 1992. 5 top firms accept CAP awards. (November 9): 30.
2. - 1994. Andersen tops CFO ratings. (March 14): 5.
3. - 1996. Ernst captures crown in client satisfaction survey. (April 8-21): 3, 38.
4. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1983. Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 47. New York, NY: AICPA.
5. - 1999. Audit Adjustments. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 89. New York, NY: AICPA.
Cited by
118 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献