Knowledge that Transforms

ABSTRACT The objective evaluation of evidence is imperative for audit effectiveness and the proper exercise of professional skepticism. However, numerous studies suggest that auditors fail to evaluate evidence objectively when assessing or addressing the risk of material misstatement due to fraud. We develop theory to predict that auditors do evaluate evidence objectively but only when they have stronger wise‐thinking dispositions (WTDs), a construct that is new to the audit literature. We define WTDs as the tendency of individuals to naturally engage in the balanced revision of beliefs and doubts about target phenomena by thinking openly and reflectively about evidence. We report prediction‐consistent results from two experiments that measure the strength of participants' WTDs and manipulate whether the underlying evidence is less or more indicative of fraud. The experimental results also document that auditors vary considerably in WTD strength and collectively demonstrate the reproducibility of audit judgment‐quality benefits of stronger WTDs. We further validate the WTD construct in auditing using confirmatory bi‐factor analyses to show that it has one higher‐order general factor along with several subfactors. Overall, our theory and results advance the literature by identifying WTDs as a determinant of auditors' ability to objectively evaluate evidence. In addition, our findings have implications for standard setters and audit firms as quality control standards and audit working paper review processes might benefit from revisions that take into account that auditors do not objectively evaluate evidence unless they have stronger WTDs.

ABSTRACT Within the context of managerial reporting, the tasks of acquiring and reporting information are logically connected. Although the accounting literature acknowledges their importance, it often treats these tasks as distinct processes. I investigate how the effort exerted to acquire information influences managers' reporting. Managers' information acquisition effort can induce psychological ownership that can lead to a sense of deservingness that increases opportunistic reporting or to a sense of responsibility that reduces opportunism. I predict that the reporting context determines the ultimate effect of information acquisition effort on reporting behavior. I test this prediction with a 2×2 budget reporting experiment. Managers are either endowed with information to report or required to exert effort to earn it, with the latter expected to generate more psychological ownership. In addition, I manipulate the saliency of honesty in the reporting context by framing reporting in terms of a business dilemma (less salient honesty) or an ethical dilemma (more salient honesty). I find that when honesty is less salient, managers build more slack into their report under earned information than endowed information. In contrast, more salient honesty alleviates the effect of earned information on slack. In a supplemental experiment, I find similar results when all managers are endowed with information to report but psychological ownership is manipulated via different firm messaging. These results have important implications for theory and practice. For example, in a less salient honesty context, technological investments that reduce managers' effort needed to acquire information can also help decrease opportunistic reporting.

ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to increase our understanding of how enabling perceptions of new management controls (MCs) can be fostered. Prior research suggests that employees are more likely to use new MCs if they perceive them as enabling. However, rapid implementation of new MCs due to circumstances such as mergers and acquisitions can leave employees feeling coerced into using them, making it difficult to foster enabling perceptions. Based on a case study where an acquirer faces pressure to impose rigid controls on an acquired firm, we suggest factors contributing to enabling perceptions. Using interviews, observation, and document analysis, we find that positive relationships and mutual trust between the acquirer and the acquiree facilitated enabling perceptions of the MCs. We show that managers at the acquirer actively fostered trust using trust‐building activities and communicated their intentions underlying the implementation of new MCs. Doing so helped employees rationalize the controls as tools to help them do their work tasks. We also find that positive relationships reinforced by regular meetings were a way of providing assistance to employees in dealing with rigid MCs. This study contributes to the literature on enabling controls by developing a processual framework that suggests how trust can foster enabling perceptions from the intentions behind the implementation of new MCs, to their development process and daily use. In doing so, the study further develops our understanding of the relationship between enabling control and trust and helps in understanding how rigid controls can be implemented without generating mistrust.

ABSTRACT Bundling managerial earnings guidance with quarterly earnings announcements (EAs) has become an increasingly common practice. This study investigates the impact of bundled guidance on analysts' forecast revisions. Our findings indicate that analysts respond more to bundled guidance than non‐bundled guidance. This effect increases with analysts' time pressure and cognitive constraints around the EA. Analysts' revisions also incorporate more of the bundled management guidance when accompanied by additional information, such as conference calls. We further find that analysts revise their forecasts more quickly following bundled guidance than non‐bundled guidance. Together, these findings are consistent with the notion that analysts place more weight on bundled guidance than on non‐bundled guidance in their forecast revisions as bundled guidance facilities analysts' timely forecast revisions following EAs. Finally, we find that analysts' forecast revisions following bundled guidance generate significant market reactions. Our findings enhance our understanding of analysts' information processing and shed light on why bundling can be an effective guidance strategy.

ABSTRACT This study examines how managers' use of expectation management is affected by their labor market mobility, which we measure by the enforceability of noncompete provisions in their employment contracts. Exploiting quasinatural experiments, our difference‐in‐differences analyses provide new causal insights to the growing literature on how managers' career concerns affect their disclosure choices. Consistent with a less mobile labor market imposing more pressure on managers to achieve earnings expectations, we predict and find that managers in US states that tightened enforcement of noncompete provisions are more likely to manage analyst expectations downward. We also find that downward expectation management is used to a greater extent than other tools such as real and accrual‐based earnings management. Additional analysis shows that the increase in expectation management is more pronounced for CEOs with lower general skills or shorter tenures, for firms with more independent boards, and for industries that are more homogeneous. Our path analysis suggests a significant link between increased use of expectation management after tightened noncompete enforcement and meeting and beating earnings expectations, which in turn is linked to lower executive turnover. Overall, our findings suggest that expectation management is an important channel through which noncompete enforcement reduces executive labor market mobility. Our study sheds light on the underlying mechanism through which labor market mobility affects disclosure choices and has important implications for both firms and regulators on the use and enforcement of noncompete provisions.

ABSTRACT We exploit the staggered introduction of the PCAOB's international inspection program to examine the role that the stringency of public audit oversight plays in shaping US institutional investors' home bias. Analyzing a sample of foreign firms listed in the United States, we evaluate whether US institutional investors hold larger equity stakes in these firms—a longstanding issue that reflects investor portfolio decisions—if their auditors are exposed to the threat of a PCAOB inspection. In a differences‐in‐differences framework, we find that US‐listed foreign firms enjoy an increase in US institutional investors' equity positions after their auditors become subject to PCAOB inspection access. Cross‐sectional analysis implies that the benefit of the PCAOB inspection threat in mitigating US institutional investors' home bias is concentrated in foreign countries without a strict local audit oversight system; active US institutional investors that are known to value accounting transparency; and firms from countries that grant PCAOB access later (after the onset of its international inspection program in 2005). Our evidence suggests that foreign firms become better known in the capital markets under the PCAOB inspection program, which induces US institutional investors to acquire larger equity stakes in US‐listed foreign firms given the lower information asymmetry that ensues under the PCAOB inspection threat.

ABSTRACT Prior research documents that information transmitted via director networks affects firms' policies and real economic activities. Given a manager's potential monopoly over firm information, it is important to analyze whether information transmission through director social networks undermines the manager's control. Specifically, we explore whether information flow through director networks influences managers' ability to hoard bad news. We predict and find that the extent of external connections of the board of directors is negatively associated with future stock price crash risk. Additional analysis implies that this evidence is driven by firms with more powerful executives, with weaker auditor monitoring, or subject to strong investor protection, and by directors with greater monitoring incentives or responsibilities and directors with less firm‐specific knowledge. Collectively, our research lends empirical support for the monitoring view under which better‐informed directors narrow the scope for bad news hoarding evident in stock price crash risk. In another series of tests, we fail to find evidence consistent with the information leakage view under which directors pass sensitive firm‐specific information to connections that trade on the information before its public release. Other analysis helps dispel the concern that the endogenous match between directors and companies is spuriously responsible for our core results. Our empirical findings have important implications on how social networks affect the proper functioning of capital markets.

ABSTRACT We study three elements of management control: incentive compensation, performance monitoring, and delegation of authority to managers to contract with lower‐level employees. Using a principal‐agent model, we highlight important direct and indirect interactions between and among these endogenous control elements, themes often emphasized in the economics and accounting literatures using the analogy of a three‐legged stool. We identify circumstances in which control elements are complements or substitutes and exhibit a coherent pattern of practices observed together. For instance, contrary to typical predictions that quality monitoring complements steep effort incentives, we find that when contracting authority adjusts easily to changes in firm circumstances, then both incentive pay and contracting authority substitute for monitoring quality, while incentive pay complements contracting authority. Overall, our findings suggest a number of empirical implications and generally inform a growing literature that documents the presence or absence of complementarities among management control elements.

ABSTRACT Starting in October 2013, auditors of premium‐listed firms in the United Kingdom are mandated to prepare an expanded auditor's report that provides details on audit procedures, risks of material misstatement (RMMs), and materiality thresholds. This regulatory change is important to study, because it aims to increase the informational value of the traditional, highly standardized, pass‐or‐fail auditor's report. We examine whether the disclosures in the expanded auditor's report provide information that is relevant for adopting firms' loan contracting terms in the post‐adoption period. Our results indicate that the introduction of the expanded auditor's report is associated with reduced loan spread and longer maturity for loan facilities of adopting firms relative to non‐adopting UK firms. When we focus on adopting firms in the post‐adoption period, we find that the number of “unique RMMs” mentioned in the auditor's report, but not in the audit committee report, are positively associated with loan spread but are not associated either with loan maturity or the number of lenders in the loan syndicate. Additional tests show that the benefits, in terms of a reduced spread, of having a lower number of “unique RMMs” accrue mostly to adopters with a poor information environment. Taken together, our results provide preliminary evidence that the expanded auditor's report disclosures contain relevant information for loan contracting in the United Kingdom. This study highlights the unique role of the expanded auditor's report in providing information relevant to lenders and supports standard setters' efforts to enrich its informational content.

ABSTRACT Motivated by the increasing influence of shareholder votes on corporate policies, we examine investors' perceptions of activism via voting. To identify instances of activism via voting, we focus on annual meetings with at least one ballot item where a substantial fraction of shareholders is expected to vote against management's voting recommendation, indicating an increase in their monitoring activity. We define such meetings as “contentious.” Using a sample of almost 28,000 meetings between 2003 and 2012, we examine stock returns over the period between the proxy filing and the annual meeting. This period captures when investors learn about the contentious nature of the upcoming meeting and form expectations about its likely impact on firms' policies. We find that abnormal stock returns prior to contentious meetings are significantly positive and higher than those prior to noncontentious meetings. These higher abnormal returns increase with the contentiousness of the meeting; are more pronounced in firms with poor past performance, which are more likely to respond to shareholder pressure; and persist after controlling for firm‐specific news and proxies for risk factors. Our results are consistent with investors' expecting activism via voting to have a positive impact on firm value, on average, and cast doubts on regulatory attempts to restrict the use of shareholder votes.