This study investigates whether the benefit firms can extract from team member communication to the team manager—who may use such information for rewarding individual team members—is affected by differences in the type of mutual monitoring information available to team members. We predict and find that team performance is higher when team members can observe only each other's effort than when they can observe both each other's effort and output levels; conversely, team performance is lower when team members can observe only each other's output than when they can observe both each other's effort and output levels. The intuition behind these results is that the type of observable mutual monitoring information creates different degrees of ambiguity regarding what should be considered a fair reward allocation for team members' contributions. Such ambiguity reduces the usefulness of team member communication to the manager for allocating rewards, resulting in lower team performance. Data Availability: Data are available from the authors upon request.

In this paper, we investigate the stock market valuation of the intangible asset created by selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenditure. Although GAAP requires immediate expensing of SG&A, prior studies show that current SG&A generates future economic benefits, suggesting that it creates an intangible asset. We find that the contemporaneous stock market seems to recognize some of the intangible asset value implicit in SG&A. Positive subsequent returns can be earned in firms with a high SG&A intangible asset value. These excess returns are more likely due to investor mispricing than to risk compensation. Furthermore, we find that both analysts' long-term growth forecast revisions and one-year-ahead forecast errors are positively associated with the future value created by current SG&A, indicating that analysts partially incorporate the intangible SG&A asset value into their forecasts. Overall, the evidence suggests that the capital market only partially recognizes the intangible asset value created by SG&A expenditure.

This study investigates whether subjective communication from team members to a manager responsible for allocating performance-based bonuses increases team performance and whether the efficacy of such communication is reduced in heterogeneous teams. We draw on both economic and behavioral theories to predict that communication content, even though subjective, provides information that enables the manager to allocate bonuses so as to enhance the relation between individuals' contributions and rewards, thereby increasing individuals' effort and team performance. However, we also predict that the positive effect of team member subjective communication is more muted when team members' abilities are heterogeneous compared to homogeneous. We test these predictions via an experiment. Consistent with our predictions, team member subjective communication has a positive effect on team performance, and the positive effect is more muted for heterogeneous teams. Results of our study contribute to both theory and practice by enhancing our understanding of the role of subjective communication from team members to team managers in motivating effort in teams and, particularly, how its efficacy is affected by team composition. Data Availability: Data are available from the authors upon request.

Research documents significant management bias and opportunism around the discretionary inputs of audited complex estimates, including fair value measurements (FVMs), which raises questions about auditors' ability to test these estimates. We examine how the degree of quantification in client evidence and client control environment risk influence auditors' planned substantive testing of management's discretionary inputs to FVMs. We find that auditors allocate a lower proportion of effort to testing the subjective inputs to the fair value estimate when the degree of quantification in the client evidence and level of client risk are both high. Further, this tendency persists even after auditors receive a regulatory practice alert reminding them to focus more audit effort on testing fair value (FV) inputs that are susceptible to management bias, and despite the auditors increasing their overall audit effort. Qualitative analyses of the procedures auditors selected indicate that inapt attention to the degree of quantification in evidence is a potential root cause of the difficulty auditors encounter when testing complex estimates. Our results imply that in situations where both quantified and non-quantified data are important to the audit, there is the potential for management to manipulate the evidence they provide to auditors to distract auditors from testing the discretionary inputs to complex estimates that are susceptible to management opportunism. Data Availability: Contact authors for data availability.

Deloitte's 2007 PCAOB Part II report identifies, among other issues, concerns related to the audit firm's quality controls with respect to auditing income tax accounts. We investigate whether Deloitte's actions to remediate the PCAOB's concerns are associated with changes to their clients' financial reporting for income taxes. We find that Deloitte's clients increased the reported valuation allowance on deferred tax assets and increased the reported reserve for uncertain tax benefits (UTBs) in response to increased auditor scrutiny over income tax accounts. Additionally, we find that in subsequent periods, Deloitte's clients report valuation allowances and UTB balances that are not significantly different than other annually inspected auditors, consistent with Deloitte changing the quality controls related to audits of income tax accounts after the failed remediation of the 2007 Part II report.

Barton (2001) and Pincus and Rajgopal (2002) show that earnings management through discretionary accruals and derivative hedging are partial substitutes in smoothing earnings before 1999. In this study, we investigate whether Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) 133 regarding hedge accounting in 2000 has influenced the relative merit of the two earnings-smoothing methods. Based on a sample of S&P 500 nonfinancial firms during 1996–2006, we find that the substitution relation between derivative hedging and discretionary accrual is significantly attenuated after FAS 133 implementation. We also document a significant increase in earnings volatility associated with derivative hedging post-FAS 133. These results are robust to the use of various model and method specifications, as well as controlling for contemporaneous macroeconomic and regulatory shocks. Overall, our results suggest that a material change in an accounting rule regarding derivatives can influence the level and volatility of reported earnings, as well as the method of income smoothing.

We investigate analytically and empirically the relationship between demand uncertainty and cost behavior. We argue that with more uncertain demand, unusually high realizations of demand become more likely. Accordingly, firms will choose a higher capacity of fixed inputs when uncertainty increases in order to reduce congestion costs. Higher capacity levels imply a more rigid short-run cost structure with higher fixed and lower variable costs. We formalize this “counterintuitive” argument in a simple analytical model of capacity choice. Following this logic, we hypothesize that firms facing higher demand uncertainty have a more rigid short-run cost structure with higher fixed and lower variable costs. We test this hypothesis for the manufacturing sector using data from Compustat and the NBER-CES Industry Database. Evidence strongly supports our hypothesis for multiple cost categories in both datasets. The results are robust to alternative specifications. Data Availability: All data used in this study are available from public sources.

Press releases accompanying earnings restatements attempt to minimize negative reactions by explaining the reasons for the restatement. Although text-based press releases have been the norm for years, firms have recently begun using online video for such announcements. We examine the implications of doing so, and find that when a CEO accepts responsibility by making an internal attribution for a restatement, investors viewing the announcement online via video recommend larger investments in the firm than do investors viewing the announcement online via text. In contrast, when the CEO denies responsibility by making an external attribution for the restatement, investors viewing the announcement online via video recommend smaller investments in the firm than do investors viewing the announcement online via text. Our results also reveal that investor trust mediates the effect of disclosure venue and attribution on investment recommendations. These findings are important given the economic significance and trust-damaging implications of restatements, as well as the increased use of online video to make important announcements. Data Availability: Contact the authors for data and video.

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) recently suggested that auditors' lack of specific fraud planning documentation has led auditors to devote insufficient attention to fraud risks in subsequent audit work. Guided by Support Theory, we experimentally investigate how the specificity of fraud risk documentation during audit planning influences auditors' subsequent audit work. We also examine the effect of priming auditors about the fraud risks identified during planning before they begin subsequent evidence evaluation. We find that auditors' planning stage efforts affect subsequent fraud risk assessments and evidence evaluation decisions. Unprimed auditors who receive more specific documentation increase their fraud risk assessments and evidence requests. Priming's effects are more complex. Priming auditors who receive summary documentation also increases fraud risk assessments and evidence requests; however, priming auditors who receive specific documentation reduces these judgments because the priming makes the client-specific risks seem less typical. Accordingly, the PCAOB's call for more documentation can have the unintended consequence of reducing auditors' sensitivity to fraud.

Protection of outside investors depends on the detection and punishment of resource diversion by corporate insiders, including managers and controlling shareholders. We focus on the role played in investor protection by self-interested auditors operating in a competitive audit market. In our setting, auditors represent the mechanism whereby detection of diversion occurs. We show that markets with relatively greater auditor penalties for audit failures and greater insider penalties for detected resource diversion have larger total investment levels, a higher proportion of the firm held by outsiders, higher audit resource investment, higher audit fees, and higher expected investment returns.