ABSTRACT This paper reports the results of three studies (archival, experimental, and qualitative) designed to examine the effects of auditor narcissism on auditor‐client negotiations in China. We contend that narcissistic characteristics fuel auditors' competitiveness and embolden them to stand firm in negotiations, potentially lengthening the negotiation process but leading to more conservative negotiation outcomes. As predicted, our archival results suggest that auditor narcissism is positively associated with audit delay and negatively associated with clients' absolute and positive discretionary accruals. Our experimental results document that narcissistic auditors are more likely to be involved in negotiations that reach an impasse or take longer to resolve and that narcissistic auditors negotiate reported asset values that reflect less aggressive reporting choices. Our qualitative results from field interviews with practicing audit partners corroborate our archival and experimental findings. Overall, the data collected using three different research methods yield consistent results in support of our theory. Our findings shed light on factors that influence audit efficiency and quality in China. We discuss the key cultural and contextual differences between China and the West as well as the implications of these differences for future research.

Investment-financing maturity mismatches are common among firms worldwide, yet little is known about how government interventions can tackle them. This paper investigates China's Industry-Finance Cooperation Pilot Program as a quasi-natural experiment to examine whether, to what extent, and through what mechanisms government policies can address maturity mismatches. Using a multi-period difference-in-differences (DID) model and a sample of publicly listed A-share firms in China from 2014 to 2022, we find that the pilot program significantly reduces maturity mismatches by improving bank-firm information flows, reducing banks' concerns over moral hazard, and narrowing the term spread between short- and long-term interest rates. These findings provide empirical evidence that government policies can simultaneously tackle both supply and demand causes of maturity mismatches. Cross-sectional analyses reveal that the mismatch alleviation effect is strongest among non-state-owned enterprises, firms with low collateral availability, financially constrained firms, and those in highly competitive industries. Further, we find that alleviating maturity mismatches enhances firm stability, lowers financial distress, and improves market valuation, suggesting that these mismatches often reflect firms' “forced choices” rather than strategic preferences. Finally, analysis of bank-level data shows that the pilot program not only benefits firms but also reduces banks' credit and financial risks. Overall, this paper offers novel insights for policymakers by demonstrating how government interventions can improve corporate financing decisions while reducing systemic financial risks. It contributes to the broader corporate finance literature by highlighting the importance of credit availability in fostering financial stability and sustainable growth, particularly in emerging markets.