SUMMARY: In 2013, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) proposed an amendment to Auditing Standard No. 12 (PCAOB 2010) that would require auditors to consider executive compensation in audit planning because of potential fraud risk associated with equity incentives. We use the association between audit fees and CEO and CFO equity incentives to infer whether auditors increase audit scope and perceive greater risk as equity incentives increase. Equity incentives are defined as the sensitivity of the value of executives' equity portfolios to changes in share price (delta incentive) and to changes in return volatility (vega incentive). We find a positive association between audit fees and vega, but not delta. However, when we interact vega with proxies for residual auditor business risk, we find that the fee premiums for risk decrease as vega increases. Our results suggest that auditors do consider executive compensation in audit planning.

We examine auditor business risk by analyzing the relation between excess cash holdings and auditor pricing behavior. Prior research links excess cash holdings to risks associated with manager opportunism and external monitoring. Our analyses provide evidence of a positive relationship between excess cash and audit fees. The economic magnitude of the increase in total audit fees due to an increase in excess cash holdings is approximately 5% greater for firms in the top quartile of excess cash holdings versus those in the bottom quartile. We also find that the strength of shareholder rights reduces the positive relationship between excess cash and audit fees, and excess cash holdings are assigned lower audit fees among firms that follow an investment-intensive strategy than those that tend to hold on to their cash. Our article contributes to the literature by examining auditor pricing of excess cash holdings, including factors that affect auditors' risk perceptions, and ultimately provides unique insights into how auditors view agency conflicts indicated by excess cash holdings.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this article is to examine whether the design of chief executive officer (CEO) compensation generates incentives to engage in managerial behavior that enhances customer satisfaction and whether these incentives, in turn, lead to higher firm value. Design/methodology/approach -A unique dataset combining customer satisfaction and executive compensation data was used, and the relationship between option sensitivity, customer satisfaction and performance was modeled using simultaneous equations modeling with industry and year fixed effects. Findings -Findings suggest that CEO compensation plays an important role in explaining the variation in customer satisfaction and firm value. Specifically, CEO short-term compensation (salary or bonus) has no affect on customer satisfaction or firm value; the sensitivity of CEO wealth from long-term incentive compensation to stock price changes is positively related and also exhibits an inverted U-shaped relationship with customer satisfaction; the sensitivity of CEO wealth from long-term incentive compensation to stock price changes interacts negatively with CEO longevity and industry concentration but positively with advertising expenses in affecting customer satisfaction; the sensitivity of CEO wealth from long-term incentive compensation to both stock price changes and customer satisfaction positively affect firm value; and the sensitivity of CEO wealth from long-term incentive compensation to stock price changes interacts positively with customer satisfaction to affect firm value. Research limitations/implications -This study suffers from several limitations. First, the sample is limited to firms with ACSI scores available. Second, this study is limited to only publicly traded firms, which limits our ability to generalize regarding customer satisfaction, option sensitivity and firm value. Practical implications -This study has several important implications for researchers and managers. The first is that the corporate board appears to view investment in customer satisfaction as similar to an investment in other intangible assets or technology, in that they reward managers with a nonlinear payoff profile. To encourage...