Knowledge that Transforms

Focusing on mandatory partner rotations, we examine the importance of within‐firm network connections to the selection of successor partners and the impact of those connections on post‐rotation audit performance. Using data from China, we track partners' history and identify incumbent‐successor connections stemming from jointly conducted prior engagements. Although these connections can enhance incumbent‐successor information transfers and thus post‐rotation audit performance, they may also pose a threat to quality by compromising the successor's independence. Among the pool of replacement candidates, we find that individuals with stronger connections with the incumbent are more likely to be appointed as successors. This finding is more pronounced when the audit engagement is more complex, client‐specific knowledge is not readily available to the succeeding partner, and the engagement is more valuable to the audit firm. We also document that successor‐incumbent connections are associated with equal or better post‐rotation audit quality and fewer client defections. These results suggest that the benefits of network‐based successor selection may outweigh its costs. By enriching our understanding of the partner transition process, this study contributes to the public policy discourse on partner rotation.

This study examines whether auditors can improve their judgment by drawing on the crowd within—that is, making the same judgment twice and averaging the two responses. Improvements in judgment are of special interest to auditors given that poor judgment threatens audit effectiveness and efficiency. The results from my experiment suggest that drawing on the crowd within helps auditors better use their task‐relevant knowledge, leading to more accurate auditor judgments relative to the judgments of an expert panel. Also, auditors can employ different task‐relevant knowledge that leads to more justifiable judgments when they are prompted (vs. not prompted) to make a limited, intuitive initial judgment as they draw on the crowd within. Overall, auditors appear to increase their task‐relevant knowledge as they develop expertise but do not appear to better use that knowledge absent intervention. Auditors can manipulate how they draw on the crowd within to achieve different audit objectives—for example, accuracy versus justifiability.

In this study, we provide theoretical guidance for both analytical research and empirical research by considering how changing expectations of earnings affect a dishonest manager's strategy to overstate earnings and an auditor's strategy to exert effort in a two‐period setting. We expect our study's insights on changing economic conditions to help shape future research. We model the manager type as either honest or dishonest, which allows us to differentiate audit risk from audit effort. The key takeaways for future research are the insights on how changes in payoffs and expected earnings affect the associations that involve earnings overstatements and audit effort with audit risk and market price. For instance, researchers typically assume audit effort and audit risk are negatively associated, but we find the association can be positive when, for example, the auditor chooses a period 2 strategy based on the changes in period 1 game parameters. The results of our study provide two additional key insights on the design of future empirical tests. First, by dichotomizing, we show the importance of estimating the intercept in the market pricing equation when studying earnings quality, because market price also adjusts for expected bias through changes in the intercept. Second, our multiperiod setting demonstrates that the effects from a change in the manager's or auditor's incentives in period 1 may reverse in period 2. Empirical studies typically examine the contemporaneous effects of these changes on market price and/or audit risk but fail to identify the cross‐temporal effects we document in our study.

We examine whether firms with managers that have prior internal audit experience are less likely to manage earnings. This examination is important because the internal audit function (IAF) is uniquely positioned to provide experiences that could influence future managerial behavior, including limiting the potential negative repercussions of earnings management. We find that firms with managers that have internal audit experience are associated with lower real earnings management (REM) but not accruals‐based earnings management. Effects are strongest when managers with internal audit experience have greater power or currently hold financial roles, or when there are a greater number of managers with internal audit experience. The results are robust to including firm fixed effects, using entropy‐balancing and performance‐matching approaches, using a subsample of firm‐years required to have an IAF, using a subsample of firms for which we can measure IAF quality, and measuring internal audit experience at a previous employer. These results point to an important benefit of manager internal audit experience, as research suggests that REM is common, difficult to detect, not always within the scope of financial reporting regulators, and detrimental to future performance.

We provide evidence on the effect of political connections on the trade‐off between real and accrual‐based earnings management in the United States. This evidence is important because prior literature documents mixed evidence on whether political connections reduce the threat of SEC enforcement. By studying earnings management with a large sample, our study provides more generalizable insights into the effects of political connections on enforcement. We argue that politically connected firms face a lower threat of enforcement, which reduces the costs of accrual‐based earnings management and alters the trade‐off between real and accrual‐based earnings management. Consistent with our predictions, using a single‐step estimation method as well as a difference‐in‐differences test based on an exogenous shock, we find that connected firms engage in more accrual management and less real earnings management. Our results are driven by firms that have relatively high costs of real earnings management. Furthermore, we find that political connections mitigate the relation between SEC comment letters and earnings management. Overall, the evidence is consistent with politically connected firms facing a lower threat of regulatory enforcement and using this flexibility to increase accrual‐based earnings management and reduce real earnings management that is potentially value destructive. Our study complements and strengthens inferences in prior work that documents evidence of lax SEC enforcement for politically connected firms using small samples. Our findings should be of interest to policy‐makers, regulators, and other professionals that are interested in understanding the effects of political connections.

I propose an explanation for the positive relation between R&D, future earnings, and future stock returns based on the fixed‐cost qualities of R&D. If R&D is relatively fixed over short horizons, demand shocks realized by some R&D firms will push these firms into R&D intensity levels that are suboptimal as common scale proxies—market equity, assets, and sales—respond more quickly to demand shocks than R&D. In response, R&D firms realizing negative demand shocks reduce future expenses and capital expenditures, producing higher future profitability on lower sales growth. Consistent with the fixed‐cost hypothesis, I find the higher future profits of high R&D firms are explained by cost cutting, not revenue growth. Collectively, the restructuring of cost and capital structures of the subset of high R&D firms realizing demand shocks explains the future profit and investment patterns of R&D firms, while the fixed‐cost qualities of R&D seem to explain patterns in future stock returns. My results have implications for literatures that examine how decisions on R&D investment levels affect future firm performance, growth, and stock returns.

We show that managers have a propensity to disproportionately report total revenues just above base‐ten thresholds (e.g., 10 million, 30 million, 1 billion) and examine motives for and consequences of this behavior. Focusing on base‐ten thresholds in revenues is important because, despite being unusually prevalent in revenue targets set in executive compensation contracts, analyst forecasts, and management forecasts, they have not been previously explored. We also show that pressure to beat these targets provides one explanation for the base‐ten bias in reported revenues. However, these incentive effects do not offer a complete explanation because base‐ten threshold‐beating is observed even in the absence of these explicit targets. We further find that when firms beat a base‐ten threshold for the first time, they experience increases in news coverage, institutional ownership, liquidity, and analyst following, even after controlling for whether they have beaten other common benchmarks. These results suggest that managers also beat base‐ten thresholds in order to increase their firms' overall visibility. Overall, we show that a preference for base‐ten numbers, which have no inherent economic meaning, has a measurable effect on the actions of market participants. These results open the door to a new range of managerial targets previously unexplored.

Motivated by ongoing worldwide efforts to improve the comparability of accounting information, I examine the temporal trend in global financial reporting comparability. Regulators have made serious efforts to improve comparability, but numerous frictions may have limited their effectiveness. Accordingly, I examine the time‐series properties of comparability measures for a sample of the 36 largest economies and provide two key empirical insights consistent with expectations. First, I confirm comparability is increasing over 2002–2018. Second, I document that this increase primarily occurs in firms applying local accounting standards, as opposed to those applying global standards (defined as either US GAAP or IFRS). Additional analyses reveal that: (i) firms applying local standards are becoming more comparable to firms applying IFRS but not to those applying US GAAP, and (ii) comparability within global‐standards firms is not changing. I also document that certain market liquidity benefits of comparability are sustained in the long term, as firms increasing comparability over the sample period experience greater reductions in bid‐ask spread and zero‐return trading days relative to those decreasing comparability. Overall, the results reveal that comparability has increased—consistent with systematic regulatory efforts—but that this increase arises heterogeneously across firms, with the primary effects in recent years occurring among those applying local standards.

This study examines corporate integrity culture—that is, a firm's shared values and behaviors related to compliance, trustworthiness, and ethics. Different from prior research that associates culture measures with general firm‐level outcomes, we evaluate the pervasiveness of the integrity culture within an organization across two disparate business functions: operations and financial reporting. We first develop a measure of corporate integrity culture based on firms' internal control environments and show that, as predicted, weak integrity culture contributes to both operational and financial non‐compliance. We next document the predicted positive contemporaneous association between operational and financial non‐compliance, controlling for the integrity culture reflected in the internal control environment. Given the organizational and physical distances and lack of day‐to‐day interactions between the two business functions, we infer that management's “tone at the top” likely affects non‐compliance in both functions. Finally, for firms with existing operational non‐compliance, we find more negative market reactions to accounting restatements and higher CEO turnover propensities following restatements. These results indicate that top management must consistently reinforce a culture of compliance and integrity, lest it decay throughout the organization. Our results also imply that regulators evaluating compliance in specific functions could benefit from reviewing compliance in other functions within the firm.

We provide evidence that regulatory guidance aimed at improving audit efficiency and effectiveness—allowing auditor reliance on a multi‐location client's competent and objective internal audit function (IAF)—can unintentionally increase auditors' litigation risk. Our research is important in demonstrating how client characteristics and juror cognitive processing, such as the number of client locations and jurors' susceptibility to the numerosity heuristic, factors beyond auditors' control, can exacerbate their litigation exposure. Consistent with theoretical predictions, we find that susceptibility to the numerosity heuristic contributes to jurors assessing an increased likelihood of misstatement on multi‐location compared to single‐location audits. Furthermore, these assessments of higher misstatement risk on multi‐location audits lead jurors to perceive that auditor reliance on the client's IAF in multi‐location audits is less appropriate (i.e., not normal). Accordingly, jurors judge that auditors are more negligent when they rely on the IAF during multi‐location audits than when they do not, but IAF reliance does not impact auditor negligence on single‐location audits. Our results suggest auditor reluctance to use a qualified IAF, despite client pressure and regulatory allowance, can provide potential benefits to firms in terms of reduced litigation exposure. Thus, we demonstrate the legal regime can undermine the objectives of regulators' guidance to enhance audit efficiency and corporate governance.