Management control in audit firms

Audit firms face a constant conflict between the business of auditing and the profession of auditing, which is manifested at audit senior level in the pressure to perform quality work within specified time limits. Prior quantitative studies have reported high levels of quality‐threatening behaviour (QTB) at senior level and the importance of examining contributory factors has been highlighted. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with audit seniors in four of the (then) Big Five firms and findings suggest that key variables (time pressure, participative target setting, and style of performance evaluation) have been inadequately operationalised in previous studies and that two distinct forms of QTB exist: deliberate and inadvertent. Propositions are developed for variables associated with both forms of QTB, which provide direction and focus for future research.

[1]  J. Bedard,et al.  Academic Auditing Research: An Exploratory Investigation into its Usefulness , 2001 .

[2]  Robin W. Roberts,et al.  Factors Associated with the Incidence of Reduced Audit Quality Behaviors , 1998 .

[3]  R. Walker.  Applied Qualitative Research , 1985 .

[4]  David Hatherly,et al.  Auditor analytical review judgement: a performance evaluation , 2003 .

[5]  M. Hirst,et al.  The role of budgetary information in performance evaluation , 1990 .

[6]  Jill L. McKinnon.  Reliability and Validity in Field Research: Some Strategies and Tactics , 1988 .

[7]  Robin Cooper,et al.  When Lean Enterprises Collide: Competing Through Confrontation , 1995 .

[8]  M. Miles.  Qualitative Data as an Attractive Nuisance: The Problem of Analysis , 1979 .

[9]  E. Morrison,et al.  WHEN EMPLOYEES FEEL BETRAYED: A MODEL OF HOW PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT VIOLATION DEVELOPS , 1997 .

[10]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[11]  D. Otley,et al.  The control problem in public accounting firms: An empirical study of the impact of leadership style , 1995 .

[12]  Michael D. Shields,et al.  Antecedents of participative budgeting , 1998 .

[13]  A. Hopwood.  An Empirical Study of the Role of Accounting Data in Performance Evaluation , 1972 .

[14]  D. Otley,et al.  Accounting for Management Control , 1990 .

[15]  C. McNair.  Proper compromises: The management control dilemma in public accounting and its impact on auditor behavior☆ , 1991 .

[16]  Bernard Pierce,et al.  Auditor time budget pressure: consequences and antecedents , 1996 .

[17]  V. Govindarajan.  Appropriateness of accounting data in performance evaluation: An empirical examination of environmental uncertainty as an intervening variable☆ , 1984 .

[18]  W. Ouchi.  A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms , 1979 .

[19]  Nils Brunsson,et al.  Ideas and actions: Justification and hypocrisy as alternatives to control , 1993 .

[20]  Joseph V. Carcello,et al.  Inappropriate Audit Partner Behavior: Views of Partners and Senior Managers , 1996 .

[21]  D. Rousseau,et al.  Violating the psychological contract: Not the exception but the norm , 1994 .

[22]  N. Denzin.  The art and politics of interpretation. , 1994 .

[23]  David J. Silverman,et al.  Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook , 1999 .

[24]  Bernard Pierce,et al.  Cost–quality conflict in audit firms: an empirical investigation , 2004 .

[25]  R. Chenhall.  Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future , 2003 .

[26]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[27]  David Otley,et al.  Management control in contemporary organizations: towards a wider framework , 1994 .

[28]  D. Otley.  BUDGET USE AND MANAGERIAL PERFORMANCE , 1978 .

[29]  A. Hopwood.  [Discussion of An Empirical Study of the Role of Accounting Data in Performance Evaluation]: A Reply , 1972 .

[30]  Christopher S. Chapman,et al.  Reflections on a contingent view of accounting , 1997 .

[31]  Anne M. Lillis,et al.  A framework for the analysis of interview data from multiple field research sites , 1999 .

[32]  Linda S. McDaniel,et al.  The Effects Of Time Pressure And Audit Program Structure On Audit Performance , 1990 .

[33]  Auditor changes and tendering: UK interview evidence , 1998 .

[34]  Mark W. Dirsmith,et al.  Informal communications, nonformal communications and mentoring in public accounting firms , 1985 .

[35]  M. Abernethy,et al.  Management control systems in research and development organizations: The role of accounting, behavior and personnel controls , 1997 .

[36]  Grant Mccracken.  The long interview , 1988 .

[37]  Michael Power,et al.  Auditing and the production of legitimacy , 2003 .

[38]  D Eden,et al.  Critical job events, acute stress, and strain: a multiple interrupted time series. , 1982, Organizational behavior and human performance.

[39]  Sandra L. Robinson,et al.  Psychological contracts and OCB: The effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic virtue behavior , 1995 .

[40]  M. J. Page,et al.  A SURVEY OF TIME BUDGET PRESSURE AND IRREGULAR AUDITING PRACTICES AMONG NEWLY QUALIFIED UK CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS , 1996 .

[41]  S. Llewelyn,et al.  What Counts as "Theory" in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing , 2003 .

[42]  Antonio Davila,et al.  Performance Measurement and Control Systems for Implementing Strategy: Text and Cases , 1999 .

[43]  A. Hopwood,et al.  Accounting and human behaviour , 1976 .

[44]  D. Otley.  The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis , 1980 .