This study investigates the implicit financial incentives of individual Big 4 audit partners by examining the association between a partner's compensation and characteristics of the audit firm, audit partner, and individual partner clientele for Big 4 firms in Sweden. Using tax and financial data for individual audit partners and clients, our empirical findings indicate that there is significant variation in the implicit determinants that are associated with compensation across the Big 4. We find that audit partners’ compensation is positively associated with the size of their clientele or the number of publicly traded clients, both of which represent revenue‐generating opportunities. Similarly, compensation and developing an industry specialization are positively related. In three firms, gaining clients is clearly related to an increase in compensation, while losing a client is associated with a reduction in partner income in only one firm. We find that audit partner income is more sensitive to performance‐related incentives, such as attracting new clients, as partners progress in their career. Finally, we find evidence that audit failures, proxied by reporting errors related to issuing a going concern opinion, are associated with lower compensation. These results should be of interest to the auditing profession, audit firms, and regulators when they consider the effects of implicit incentives of partner compensation on audit quality.

This study examines the role of an individual auditor's cognitive ability in delivering high‐quality audits. Our results from analyzing archival data from Sweden show that audit partners' IQ scores obtained from psychological tests are positively associated with going‐concern audit reporting accuracy and audit fee premiums. We also find some, albeit weak, evidence that audit partners' IQ scores are negatively associated with the income‐increasing abnormal accruals of the client. These results suggest that, although audit services are standardized through various control mechanisms and audits are conducted by teams rather than by individual auditors, the cognitive ability of audit partners responsible for an audit remains important in delivering high‐quality audit services.

This study examines whether better performance on the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) exam is associated with an auditor's career success and whether any relation differs based on gender. Our study adds to prior studies on the career development of auditors by showing that the auditor's performance on the exam predicts success during the auditor's career. Although there is little difference in the average CPA exam scores of male versus female auditors, we document gender differences in the relation between performance on the CPA exam and career success. Male auditors who pass the exam with superior results receive higher annual compensation than those with weaker results. They are also more likely to become partners in Big 4 accounting firms and have larger client portfolios. For female auditors, we find weaker or no association between CPA exam scores and compensation or other indicators of career success. Our path analysis shows that the mechanisms underlying career success work differently for men and women. CPA exam scores of male auditors have a direct effect on compensation and an indirect (mediating) effect through promotion to partner and client portfolio size. However, for female auditors, exam scores have no effect on promotion to partner or client portfolio size, and exam scores have a much smaller effect on compensation. Our findings suggest that CPA exam scores translate into career success for male auditors but not for female auditors.

Using a novel data set of misconduct records for Finnish CEOs and directors and their parents, we explore whether corporate executives’ financial misconduct is associated with similar behavior by their parents. Controlling for various other factors of executive financial misconduct, we find that executives are significantly more likely to engage in financial misconduct, including accounting, tax, and other financial offenses, if their parents have a history of financial misconduct. This intergenerational association is stronger when the parental misconduct is more severe. Additional findings reveal that growing up in high‐misconduct municipalities and cohabiting with spouses who engage in financial misconduct are also associated with a higher likelihood of executive misconduct, indicating that such behaviors may be shaped by broader socialization processes that extend beyond the immediate family. Although our analyses do not establish causal relationships, the collective evidence presented in this study offers insights into why some corporate executives engage in misconduct while others do not.