Oversight responsibilities for many audit committees (ACs) are evolving to include some of the hottest topics in the boardroom: enterprise risk management, cybersecurity, and environmental, social, and governance reporting. However, certain ACs avoid overseeing these evolving areas, creating significant variation across boards in the assignment of responsibilities. In this study, we seek to understand how ACs respond when environmental changes create new evolving risks that may extend the boundary of their traditional domain. To do so, we interview a diverse set of 29 AC members from U.S. publicly traded companies. We analyze our data through the theoretical lens of collaborative boundary work to identify how ACs respond by extending, blurring, or maintaining their perceived oversight boundaries, the related implications of these decisions, and their key tactics employed to manage AC workload. Our findings should be of interest to boards, investors, and regulators tasked with monitoring AC effectiveness.

Creativity drives profit in an idea economy, and many companies organize teams to facilitate creativity. This paper investigates the strategic deployment of individuals to boost a team’s creativity. More individualistic team members tend to generate highly original ideas yet are less likely to share these ideas. We theorize that adding a connector—an individual strongly predisposed to form and foster relationships—to a team will enable more idea sharing among individualistic team members, thus increasing the likelihood that the team’s creative potential will be realized. We leverage a new conceptualization of the “connector” construct to identify connectors and then use an experiment to study the impact of their presence or absence on team creative performance. Our results support these predictions and suggest that connectors improve team creativity by enabling others to share in the creative process and not because connectors themselves exhibit greater creative performance than their average peer. Data Availability: The data reported in the paper are available from the authors.

There is limited evidence about when, why, and which individuals incur costs to acquire nonpublic information about a firm, largely due to the difficulty of observing private information acquisition. To overcome this difficulty, we obtain data on Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). We predict and find that perceived information asymmetry between managers and outsiders resulting from both proprietary and agency costs triggers FOIA search. We categorize organizations making FOIA requests using their business descriptions and find that many, including law and intellectual property firms, are not expressly interested in obtaining information for near-term equity trading. Instead, their search activity relates to determinants beyond financial characteristics, including patent litigation and executive turnover. Taken together, we provide evidence on private information search by a relatively unexamined set of organizations and shed new light on the function of the SEC’s Office of FOIA Services.

In 2011, Colombia instituted a tax on repayment of bank loans, which increased the cost of short‐term bank credit more than long‐term credit. Firms responded by cutting short‐term loans for liquidity management purposes and increasing the use of cash and trade credit. In industries in which trade credit is more accessible (based on U.S. Compustat firms), we find substitution into accounts payable and little effect on cash and investment. Where trade credit is less available, firms increase cash and cut investment. Thus, trade credit provides an alternative source of liquidity that can insulate some firms from bank liquidity shocks.

We investigate changes in the quality and cost of audit services surrounding PCAOB Rule 3211, which requires disclosure of audit partner names in Form AP. To isolate changes due to Rule 3211 from other confounding factors, we use difference-in-differences analyses with separate control groups, including a group of companies that disclosed partner identities prior to Rule 3211. Our study also incorporates several measures from prior literature to proxy for various dimensions of audit quality. Evidence from the difference-in-differences analyses reveals that any immediate impact of Rule 3211 on audit quality or fees is limited to specific dimensions of audit quality, specific control groups, and/or specific company characteristics. We reach this conclusion after considering alternative research designs and evaluating confidence intervals for statistically insignificant coefficients. We caution that our findings only provide initial evidence and further research is necessary to evaluate other potential impacts of Rule 3211.

This paper evaluates the impact of three different performance incentive schemes using data from a social experiment that randomized 88 Mexican high schools with over 40,000 students into three treatment groups and a control group. Treatment 1 provides individual incentives for performance on curriculum-based mathematics tests to students only, treatment 2 to teachers only, and treatment 3 gives both individual and group incentives to students, teachers, and school administrators. Program impact estimates reveal the largest average effects for treatment 3, smaller impacts for treatment 1, and no impact for treatment 2.

In the absence of random treatment assignment, the selection of appropriate control variables is essential to designing well-specified empirical tests of causal effects. However, the importance of control variables seems under-appreciated in accounting research relative to other methodological issues. Despite the frequent reliance on control variables, the accounting literature has limited guidance on how to select them. We evaluate the evolution in the use of control variables in accounting research and discuss some of the issues that researchers should consider when choosing control variables. Using simulations, we illustrate that more control is not always better and that some control variables can introduce bias into an otherwise well-specified model. We also demonstrate other issues with control variables, including the effects of measurement error and complications associated with fixed effects. Finally, we provide practical suggestions for future accounting research. Data Availability: All data used are publicly available from sources cited in the text.

Consulting service revenues recently surpassed audit revenues as the primary income source for the largest accounting firms. Since SOX limits the provision of consulting services to audit clients, this shift in revenues implies that firms and many clients likely choose between audit and consulting relationships. We explore the implications of this by developing and validating a measure of client-level consulting needs that can likely be fulfilled by accounting firms, which we refer to as “consulting opportunities.” As predicted, we find that consulting opportunities relate positively to auditor switches. We also find that consulting opportunities relate negatively to subsequent Big 4 auditor selection—the firms focusing most on consulting—but we fail to find evidence that consulting opportunities relate to deteriorations in audit quality. Together, our results suggest that legislation limiting firms' ability to deliver consulting services to audit clients may have reduced audit market concentration without discernably impacting quality. Data Availability: All data used are publicly available from sources cited in the text.

We provide the first systematic evidence on the link between long‐short anomaly portfolio returns—a cornerstone of the cross‐sectional literature—and the time‐series predictability of the aggregate market excess return. Using 100 representative anomalies from the literature, we employ a variety of shrinkage techniques (including machine learning, forecast combination, and dimension reduction) to efficiently extract predictive signals in a high‐dimensional setting. We find that long‐short anomaly portfolio returns evince statistically and economically significant out‐of‐sample predictive ability for the market excess return. The predictive ability of anomaly portfolio returns appears to stem from asymmetric limits of arbitrage and overpricing correction persistence.