Research suggests that staff auditors are more comfortable interacting with client personnel through email than face-to-face and that this choice of communication mode has the potential to impact audit outcomes. However, very little is known about how staff auditors choose a communication mode and its effects on their client interactions. Therefore, we present survey-based evidence that the majority of staff auditors prefer to interact with the client face-to-face but use face-to-face and email relatively equally. Auditors who primarily email the client place less value on client connection and those who prefer email report feeling more communication anxieties related to the client. Importantly, the use of face-to-face communication is associated with more positive and productive client interactions. Firms can use the results of our study to understand the factors influencing staff auditors’ preference for and use of different communication modes and its effect on audit outcomes, particularly as remote work increases.
Accounting research finds that staff auditors, who increasingly interact with high-level client management, maintain positions of lower power in auditor-client interactions. We conduct semi-structured interviews with 22 practicing associate- and senior-level auditors to investigate staff auditor-client interactions and their outcomes. Our results shed light on a deep-rooted power dynamic between staff-level auditors and their clients, whereby clients maintain the upper hand during the evidence collection process. We also document auditors’ concern for their clients’ perception of them and the audit team. Finally, we observe that auditors often struggle to fulfill their professional responsibilities while also ingratiating themselves to the client. These forces often lead to audit quality threatening behaviors such as client avoidance and “ghost ticking.” Our results suggest that ongoing power disparities between staff auditors and their clients may impair staff auditors’ operational independence.
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.