We examine whether auditors share private information about some clients in their portfolio to benefit other clients (i.e., brokerage houses). This is a salient issue in China, where there are concerns about auditors leaking information to related parties, and where we observe variation in connectedness between brokerage houses and companies through shared auditors. We document that brokerage houses that share an auditor with a company issue comparatively more accurate earnings forecasts for that company. Next, cross‐sectional variation in forecast accuracy is associated with several proxies for brokerage houses' and auditors' costs and incentives to share information (e.g., investor protection, media coverage, public listing status, and the client's economic importance). Finally, auditors are more likely to secure future audits from IPO deals sponsored by brokerage house clients with higher forecast accuracy. Collectively, our evidence is suggestive of auditors sharing private information with brokerage houses in anticipation of reciprocity in the form of lucrative future engagements.

An audit committee (AC) report is the primary channel through which investors learn about the responsibilities and activities of an AC. AC members may use personal language (“we”) or impersonal language (“the audit committee”) in an AC report. Psychology research suggests that personal (vs. impersonal) language signals that the language user has greater warmth and sense of communion (i.e., being part of a larger group). Applying this theory, we predict that an AC's use of personal (vs. impersonal) language leads investors to perceive a warmer and more communal AC, and that an AC's perceived warmth/communion (cued by personal language) positively impacts investor judgments. We further posit that the positive effect of personal language is stronger when AC compensation is largely short term than long term. This is because investors need more assurance of AC oversight effectiveness when AC compensation is short term, which makes investors rely more on heuristic cues such as AC language to make judgments. Consistent with this prediction, we find that when AC compensation is largely short term, nonprofessional investors (proxied by Master of Business Administration students) react more positively to an AC's use of personal language than impersonal language. The effect of AC language is insignificant when AC compensation is largely long term, as the long‐term compensation structure already provides assurance about the AC's oversight effectiveness, and thus, investors rely less on heuristic cues. Furthermore, we find that the perceived warmth of AC members explains the effect of AC language. Finally, our interviews with nonprofessional investors corroborate some of our main findings and validate their practice implications.

The literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure focuses on its economic consequences, but little is known about motivations—especially CEO personal incentives—behind such disclosure. Using an array of CSR reporting measures, we find that career concerns of CEOs early in their tenure motivate them to use voluntary CSR reporting as a signaling mechanism. The negative association between CEO tenure and CSR reporting is more pronounced in firms with stronger information intermediaries—that is, a higher level of socially responsible investors, a higher number of analysts following, and a higher level of media coverage. We also find that CEOs early in their tenure receive more personal benefits after voluntary CSR reporting, in terms of higher total compensation, better reputation, and less turnover, than CEOs later in their tenure. Taken together, the findings of our study lend support to the conjecture that CEO career concerns early in their tenure can be an important determinant of firms' voluntary CSR reporting.