Search results

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) imposes significant costs on organizations, thus antecedents of CWB are of particular interest to both practitioners and academics. The authors examine how one’s own narcissism interacts with co-worker narcissism to influence willingness to engage in retaliatory CWB against a co-worker.

The data for this study were obtained from Amazon Mechanical Turk participants and Master of Business Administration students, representing a cross-section of employee representatives.

The authors find that employees expect narcissistic co-workers to engage in continuing future CWB and this, in turn, increases employees' willingness to engage in retaliatory CWB. That is, non-narcissistic employees are provoked to engage in organizationally-destructive behaviors by peers perceived as narcissists. This affect is attenuated by the employee’s own narcissism. Relative to non-narcissists, narcissistic employees find a narcissistic co-worker more likeable, which reduces their willingness to engage in retaliatory CWB against the co-worker.

For corporations and HR managers, this study demonstrates the caution necessary when considering hiring and operational practices. Specifically, non-narcissists demonstrate increased willingness to engage in organizationally-destructive behaviors after interpersonal conflict with a narcissistic co-worker.

The authors extend prior research about interpersonal drivers of CWB, which primarily considered superior-subordinate dyad, by examining the joint effects of individual and co-worker narcissism in peer-to-peer relationships.

Prior research in psychology reports an age-based bias against narcissists. We examine whether managers' reactions to narcissistic subordinates exhibit a similar bias. Using an experimental method, where we manipulate subordinate narcissism, we find evidence of an age-based bias. Older managers react to a narcissistic subordinate by making conservative revisions to the subordinate's aggressive accounting estimates. They do so even at the cost of failing to meet a personally beneficial earnings target. A test of moderated mediation shows the actions of older managers (in their late 40s and older) were driven by their negative perceptions of the narcissistic subordinate. Our work demonstrates that not all individuals perceive narcissists the same way, and has implications for manger/subordinate relationships, and group dynamics involving mixed personalities and ages.

“The definition of auditing calls for the communication of the degree of correspondence between assertions and established criteria” [ASOBAC, 1973]. As the profession has rejected adoption of universal quantitative definitions of materiality as infeasible [FASB, 1979], Don Leslie [1984] recommended adoption of a standard requiring disclosure of specific engagement materiality thresholds in the auditor's report. This study examines how such disclosures might affect perceptions of an auditor's culpability and liability in instances where post publication errors are discovered which alternately aggregate to more or less than reported materiality thresholds. A behavioral experiment was conducted in which eighty‐seven U.S. general jurisdiction judges participated. Findings support the potential for meaningful modifications to the standard auditor's report to reduce perceived auditor liability but also note the importance of jurists' pre‐experimental attitudes and beliefs respecting the public accounting profession. In 1985, the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants published Materiality: The Concept and its Application to Auditing [CICA, 1985]. In that research study, Don Leslie focused on his perceptions of the communication deficiencies of the standard form audit report used in Canada and the U.S. — the most critical of which he found to be the continuing lack of a quantitative definition of materiality. Leslie's remedy for the problem was novel and controversial even if his recognition of this problem was not without precedent. Leslie did not recommend the prompt adoption of universal, quantitative materiality standards (a proposal which has stalemated progress in the profession for years) but rather adoption of a standard making it compulsory that auditors disclose their individual materiality standards, whatever they may be, on each specific audit, in the audit report. To date, no serious research has examined this proposal since the report's publication, and yet the costs of the communications gap between accounting/auditing professionals and the public seem to be getting greater. The Auditing Standards Board recently readdressed the communications provided by the standard form audit report. One of the clearest observa‐tions to emerge from those deliberations was that there is a lack of reliable research data upon which to base regulatory decisions in this area [Elliott and Jacobson, 1987]. This paper contributes to reduce that vacuum. Specifically, on the following pages we outline the genesis of a research project and the findings of that study in which eighty‐seven (87) U.S. judges evaluated whether and to what degree an altered form of the audit report (including quantitative definition of materiality) would reduce the assessed culpability and legal liability of auditors. The remaining sections of this paper are organized as follows: in section one, we will summarize representative recent relevant literature; in section two, we develop testable hypotheses from that background literature; in section three, we provide a description of the design of our study; in section 4, our findings are reported and in section 5 we discuss implications for practice and future research.

During the last several years, a stream of research has evolved that investigates the influence of outcome information on evaluation judgments in an auditor legal liability context. These studies have included judges and jurors and have utilized different cases and scenarios. Our objective in this paper is to review and discuss insights from this stream of research. This research consists of three phases. Phase 1 focuses on the robust manifestation of outcome effects in an audit legal liability context, Phase 2 examines the effectiveness of selected mitigation strategies in moderating outcome effects, and Phase 3 begins the process of developing a preliminary theoretical framework. We also discuss future research that could be done to better understand outcome effects and to test operational responses and proposed remedies.

The dangers of management bias and the resulting increased need for auditors to be cognizant of environmental characteristics may be particularly acute in the area of accounting estimates. Accounting estimates pose relatively unique auditing problems because it is an area where management has significant discretion (to set estimates) and there is limited ability to apply traditional accounting controls. Thus auditors have difficulty obtaining conclusive evidence to challenge management′s estimates. Research examining auditors′ accounting estimate judgments, however, has been scant, especially with regard to the relationship of auditors′ assessment of materiality and risks of fraudulent financial reporting. Reports the results of an empirical study examining the reporting decisions of audit seniors and audit managers related to a client′s decision to change four accounting estimates relative to the prior year. The auditor′s task was to review the changes and to indicate whether audit adjustments proposed by the audit staff were necessary to preserve an unqualified opinion. Three environmental red flags related to management lifestyle, bonus compensation programme and internal audit department strength were manipulated between subjects. The results indicated that the direct effect of the red flags on reporting decisions was limited. The findings provided greater support for an indirect model. In the indirect model, red flags affected auditors′ assessments of management intent, which, in turn, influenced auditors′ reporting decisions in combination with assessed materiality and level of auditor experience.

Prior research has documented the existence of a white male culture in large public accounting firms that has long dominated most aspects of these firms. This culture has arguably resulted in systematic workplace bias against females and minorities and their exclusion from opportunities for advancement. The accounting profession, led by the Big Five firms, has recently focused efforts on developing a new “diversity culture” intended to make the workplace more accessible to and supportive of all personnel. This exploratory study examines the current impact of race and gender on the performance evaluation judgments of audit seniors representing one Big Five firm. The results indicate that, under some circumstances, the job performance and career prospects of females (both non-white and white) were rated as high as, or higher than, those of white males. The implications of these findings for the profession and future research are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the interactive effect of the provision of non‐audit services (NAS) and auditors' perceptions of management integrity on assessments of risk of material misstatement.

The research method consisted of a behavioral experiment involving 47 audit seniors from a big‐four accounting firm.

Manipulations of management integrity significantly affected risk assessments. Manipulations of NAS did not affect risk assessment. However, a significant interaction manifested itself – participants who role‐played auditors providing significant tax consulting services tended to highly discount the incremental risk of material misstatement arising out of dubious management integrity, compared with their counterparts who role‐played auditors not providing any NAS.

This study shows that, while provision of NAS may not in and of itself impact auditor independence, it has the potential to impact audit quality by mitigating the effect of other audit evidence. This study also highlights the importance of testing for interactions since main effects may not readily capture the complexities involved.

The finding calls for continuing attention to the issue of NAS provision and audit firm culture and a redoubling of efforts to ameliorate the effects of auditor‐provided NAS.

This is one of the few papers that consider the interactive effect of provision of NAS and CEO image on assessment of management integrity. This is important because the likelihood of fraud increases when management integrity is suspect and the auditor is not vigilant.

In 1988, the US standard form audit report experienced its first major modification in 39 years. Among the objectives of the “new” report were better auditor/user communications leading to, among other things, an abridgement of auditor liability. Nearly a decade later, this issue has yet to be addressed empirically and with rigour. The empirical research reported examines the ability of the “new” audit report to reduce perceptions of auditor responsibility/liability across two instances of alleged audit failure. It is argued that a jurist’s advantage of “perfect hindsight” may mitigate the effectiveness of revised communications contained in the audit report, in instances where audit risk at the time of the audit appears high. Accordingly, consideration of environments of both high and low perceived risk were provided in a behavioural experiment conducted with 81 investors serving as subjects. Findings reveal that the revised audit report language may provide relief for auditor liability, but the presence of red‐flags, or red‐flag related environmental conditions, may exacerbate negative perceptions.

To determine the effect of audit firm rotation and/or audit partner rotation on individuals' confidence in the quality of audited financial statements.

Two separate behavioral studies were conducted with participants from the business and legal community (MBA and law students). In each study, one‐way analysis of variance was conducted using a between‐subjects approach. The independent measure was auditor rotation; the dependent measure was participants' responses to questions regarding company earnings. Because an experimental approach was utilized, the stimulus materials excluded potentially relevant information for this task. In addition, the participants were not held accountable for their decisions, nor was there any explicit motivation provided. Future research could explore other richer more complex case scenarios that provides some explicit motivation for participants.

Results revealed that even in an environment of strong controls for corporate governance, audit firm rotation incrementally influenced individuals' confidence in financial statements. However, audit partner rotation did not have a similar effect.

Little if any research examines both audit firm rotation and audit partner rotation. This research fills this void by addressing both concepts. The results suggest that rotating the audit firm will, contrary to GAO assumptions, better advance the goal to enhance auditor independence and audit quality and to restore investor confidence in the capital markets.