Auditors' Efficiency Motivated Evaluation

Abstract This paper proposes an evaluation approach – “Efficiency Motivated Evaluation” (EME hereafter) – that auditors use in response to increased efficiency demands. EME is defined as discounting (emphasizing) negative (positive) audit evidence and making favorable assessments as the demands for efficiency increase. We propose that increased time pressure will exacerbate auditors' use of EME but that experience will mitigate this tendency. We conduct an experiment in which 83 auditors differing in experience evaluated internal control effectiveness under high or low time budget pressure. Consistent with expectations based on EME, auditors assess overall internal control effectiveness higher, and positive information about controls as more relevant, under high (compared to) low time budget pressure. Moreover, we find that less (compared to more) experienced auditors under high time budget pressure rate negative information about controls as less relevant. The results suggest the importance of assigning experienced staff to high time budget pressure engagements.

[1]  Joanna L. Y. Ho,et al.  Enhancing Knowledge Sharing in Public Accounting Firms , 2006 .

[2]  Thomas Kida,et al.  Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. , 1991 .

[3]  R. Berliner,et al.  COMMENTS ON PCAOB PROPOSED AUDITING STANDARD An Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting that is Integrated with an Audit of Financial Statements and Related Proposals , 2007 .

[4]  Acs Task Force on Professionalism.  Code of professional conduct. , 2003 .

[5]  Michael D. Akers,et al.  Underreporting of Chargeable Time: The Impact of Gender and Characteristics of Underreporters , 2003 .

[6]  David P. Donnelly,et al.  Auditor Acceptance of Dysfunctional Audit Behavior: An Explanatory Model Using Auditors' Personal Characteristics , 2003 .

[7]  K. Johnstone.  Client-Acceptance Decisions: Simultaneous Effects of Client Business Risk, Audit Risk, Auditor Business Risk, and Risk Adaptation , 2006 .

[8]  Kimberly K. Moreno,et al.  The Impact of Pressure from Potential Client Business Opportunities on the Judgments of Auditors across Professional Ranks , 2003 .

[9]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model , 1987 .

[10]  Douglas F. Prawitt,et al.  Adaptive Responses to Time Pressure: The Effects of Experience on Tax Information Search Behavior , 1997 .

[11]  Z. Kunda,et al.  The case for motivated reasoning. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  Brian C. Spilker,et al.  Confirmation Bias in Tax Information Search: A Comparison of Law Students and Accounting Students , 2000 .

[13]  Randal J. Elder,et al.  A Longitudinal Investigation of Auditor Error Projection Decisions , 2005 .

[14]  R. Houston,et al.  The Effects of Fee Pressure and Client Risk on Audit Seniors' Time Budget Decisions , 1999 .

[15]  Z. Kunda,et al.  Social Cognition: Making Sense of People , 1999 .

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

[17]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[18]  A. Wright,et al.  The Effect of Partner Preferences on the Development of Risk-Adjusted Program Plans , 2005 .

[19]  David Woodliff,et al.  The Effect of Risk of Misstatement on the Propensity to Commit Reduced Audit Quality Acts under Time Budget Pressure , 2004 .

[20]  William F. Messier,et al.  An Experimental Assessment of Recent Professional Developments in Nonstatistical Audit Sampling Guidance , 2001 .

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

[22]  Christine M. Haynes,et al.  The Relationship between Client Advocacy and Audit Experience: An Exploratory Analysis , 2002 .

[23]  Ken T. Trotman,et al.  The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective , 1997 .

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

[25]  Jean C. Bedard,et al.  The Role of Problem Representation Shifts in Auditor Decision Processes in Analytical Procedures , 1999 .

[26]  Bernard Pierce,et al.  Management control in audit firms , 2004 .

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

[28]  James A. Scepansky,et al.  Motivated sensitivity to preference-inconsistent information. , 1998 .

[29]  A. Wright,et al.  The effects of fee pressure and partner pressure on audit planning decisions , 2001 .

[30]  Robert D. Allen,et al.  A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Auditor Risk Assessments and Sample Size Decisions , 2003 .

[31]  Diane D Pattison,et al.  Survey On The Differential Effects Of Time Deadline Pressure Versus Time Budget Pressure On Auditor Behavior , 2011 .

[32]  Steven M. Glover.  The influence of time pressure and accountability on auditors' processing of nondiagnostic information , 1997 .

[33]  Jane Kennedy,et al.  Debiasing Audit Judgment With Accountability - A Framework And Experimental Results , 1993 .

[34]  M Seyrani,et al.  AN EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF EXPERIENCE AND TASK COMPLEXITY ON AUDIT JUDGMENTS , 2009 .

[35]  Steven M. Glover,et al.  Why Do Auditors Over‐Rely on Weak Analytical Procedures? The Role of Outcome and Precision , 2005 .

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

[37]  P. Tetlock.  Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution error. , 1985 .

[38]  Jamie I. D. Campbell,et al.  Effects of response time deadlines on adults’ strategy choices for simple addition , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[39]  R. Prislin,et al.  Motivated Cognitive Processing and Attitude Change , 1998 .

[40]  Steven E. Kaplan,et al.  An examination of tax reporting recommendations of professional tax preparers , 1988 .

[41]  R. Quick.  [Rez.] Glover, Steven M./Prawitt, Douglas F./Wilks, T. Jeffrey: Why Do Auditors Over-Rely on Weak Analytical Procedures? The Role of Outcome and Precision, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Supplement 2005 , 2006 .

[42]  Constance M. Lehmann,et al.  The Effects of Experience on Complex Problem Representation and Judgment In Auditing: An Experimental Investigation , 2006 .

[43]  W. Knechel.  The business risk audit: Origins, obstacles and opportunities , 2007 .

[44]  Guy P. Lander.  The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 , 2002 .

[45]  S. F. Biggs,et al.  Aggressive Client Reporting: Factors Affecting Auditors' Generation of Financial Reporting Alternatives , 2002 .

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