gender, social desirability response bias, ethics research,
SYNOPSIS Finding qualified accounting staff has consistently been a top issue facing CPA firms. However, little is known about the factors that influence accountants' decisions to seek careers with different types of firms. In our paper, we use Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behavior to examine the reasons why some accountants seek careers at Big 4 firms, while other accountants seek careers at non-Big 4 firms. We survey accounting students and find that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control each influence firm-choice decisions. To provide additional insight into our results, we survey accounting professionals from Big 4 and non-Big 4 accounting firms. We find that, overall, students' perceptions, while more limited, are similar to those of accounting professionals. Further, we find that accounting professionals provide a number of insightful comments that offer several important implications for accounting firms. Finally, we assess whether accounting professionals perceive that certain types of accounting students are more likely to succeed at Big 4 versus non-Big 4 firms, and whether recruiting efforts are consistent with these perceptions. Data Availability: Data are available upon request.
This article explores the impact of two previously overlooked characteristics, compliance with Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) standards and the presence of potentially competing duties, on external auditors' perceptions of internal audit competence, objectivity, and, in turn, their willingness to rely on the internal audit function. This research finds that external auditors consider internal audit functions to be more competent and objective when they fully comply with IIA standards and that external auditors consider internal auditors to be more objective in the absence of any potentially competing duties in other areas. Overall, ratings of objectivity and competence relate to the decision to rely on the internal audit function. This study contributes by providing evidence that external auditors are more willing to rely on internal audit functions that comply with IIA standards and do not perform managerial/consulting duties, even though evidence suggests internal audit functions often do not fully comply with IIA standards and do perform managerial/consulting duties. Additionally, this study's results suggest that remedial action could reduce external audit fees and improve internal audit quality.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how firms can enhance feedback systems by studying the effects of offering junior auditors an opportunity to provide upward feedback and acknowledging their voice has been heard and will be considered for evaluation purposes. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a 2 × 1 + 1 (voice confirmation × opportunity + no opportunity) between-subjects experimental design that manipulated upward feedback opportunity (i.e., opportunity or no opportunity) and voice confirmation for those that do receive upward feedback opportunity (i.e., receive indication upward feedback was heard and will be considered or receive no indication upward feedback was heard). Within the no upward feedback opportunity condition participants did not have a chance to receive voice confirmation. Findings Through analysis of 117 upper-division undergraduate accounting students, the authors find the receipt of upward feedback opportunity and voice confirmation positively influence justice perceptions. Furthermore, the authors find interactional justice is positively associated with organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB), negatively associated with counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) and mediates the association between upward feedback voice confirmation and both OCB and CWB through indirect-only mediation. The authors also find distributive justice facilitates competitive and indirect-only mediation between upward feedback opportunity and OCB and CWB. Originality/value This is the first study to examine the influence of giving staff auditors the opportunity to provide upward feedback and informing upward feedback providers (e.g., staff) their voice has been heard and will be considered for evaluation purposes.
Audit fieldwork is shifting from the client site to remote environments due to generational preferences, budget restrictions, and health mandates as seen with the COVID‐19 pandemic. This may negatively impact professional skepticism without purposeful safeguards. Based in Social Presence Theory (SPT), our experiment uses Big 4 senior auditors to examine how the perceived level of social presence (high vs. low) influences an auditor's professional skepticism and how increasing one's feeling of accountability can increase auditor skepticism in a remote audit environment. We predict and find that auditors who feel a greater degree of social presence with their client are more skeptical. We also find that increasing an auditor's feelings of accountability can increase skepticism, and that increasing accountability in a low social presence environment can mitigate lower feelings of professional skepticism. This finding offers an effective and efficient method to help auditors remain skeptical in remote audit environments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.