واکنش های مدیران متقاضیان حسابرسی به بازخورد
ترجمه نشده

واکنش های مدیران متقاضیان حسابرسی به بازخورد

عنوان فارسی مقاله: ارائه “پیام جدی”: واکنش های مدیران متقاضیان حسابرسی به بازخورد
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: Delivering the “tough message”: Moderators of subordinate auditors’ reactions to feedback
مجله/کنفرانس: حسابداری، سازمان ها و جامعه - Accounting, Organizations and Society
رشته های تحصیلی مرتبط: حسابداری
گرایش های تحصیلی مرتبط: حسابرسی
کلمات کلیدی فارسی: بررسی حسابرسی، اثر بازخورد، جهت گیری بازخورد، چارچوب هدف، بررسی کارنامه، بررسی اشتغال
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی: Audit review، Feedback sign، Feedback orientation، Goal framing، Workpaper review، Engagement review
نوع نگارش مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article)
نمایه: Scopus - Master Journal List - JCR
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.02.002
دانشگاه: Virginia Commonwealth University, 301 W. Main Street, Box 844000, Richmond, VA 23284-4000, United States
ناشر: الزویر - Elsevier
نوع ارائه مقاله: ژورنال
نوع مقاله: ISI
سال انتشار مقاله: 2018
ایمپکت فاکتور: 2/155 در سال 2017
شاخص H_index: 110 در سال 2019
شاخص SJR: 1/771 در سال 2017
شناسه ISSN: 0361-3682
شاخص Quartile (چارک): Q1 در سال 2017
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی: PDF
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی: 17
وضعیت ترجمه: ترجمه نشده است
قیمت مقاله انگلیسی: رایگان
آیا این مقاله بیس است: بله
کد محصول: E10885
فهرست انگلیسی مطالب

Abstract


1- Introduction


2- Background and hypotheses


3- Method


4- Results


5- Conclusions and limitations


References

نمونه متن انگلیسی مقاله

Abstract


The audit review process is a key quality control mechanism. Recent evidence from practice suggests that regulatory risk has made reviews more critical, and audit supervisors are struggling with how to effectively deliver the “tough message”. We contribute to the audit review literature by providing an in-depth understanding of the subordinate's perspective, focusing on the understudied topic of negative feedback and factors that might moderate its effects. We investigate these issues using an experiential questionnaire soliciting subordinate auditors' reactions to highly salient actual review experiences. We find both adverse and beneficial reactions to more negative feedback, including worse attitudes toward coaching relationships, more attempts to manage supervisors' impressions, but greater performance improvement efforts. These reactions are moderated by the subordinate auditor's feedback orientation (i.e., receptivity), and sometimes by the supervisor's goal framing (i.e., emphasis on learning versus performance). Collectively, participants more often chose engagement over workpaper reviews to represent their most salient experiences, and some results differ between these review contexts. Qualitative analysis identifies both similarities and differences in key attributes of these review types. These results are important, as the audit review literature predominately considers workpaper review, and no study compares the two review contexts.


Introduction


The learning environment in the auditing profession is characterized as an apprenticeship model in which on-the-job learning is required in order to acquire professional knowledge and move up the organizational hierarchy (Westermann, Bedard, & Earley, 2015). A key component of this learning is the formal audit review process, which provides auditors with developmental feedback (Andiola, 2014; Trotman, Bauer, & Humphreys, 2015). Consistent with the critical role that review plays in audit firm quality control, over 30 percent of supervisors' hours are allocated to review and about 20 percent of review time is spent coaching subordinates (Fargher, Mayorga, & Trotman, 2005; Jenkins, Ater, Gimbar, Saucedo, & Wright, 2017). Research in organizational behavior finds that supervisors are often concerned about providing criticism to subordinates, as it may reduce employee satisfaction and lead to counterproductive behaviors (Belschak & Den Hartog, 2009; Brown, Kulik, & Lim, 2016). This concern resonates with the current situation in audit practice. More stringent regulatory regimes have put pressure on firms to ensure that their personnel meet high performance standards (Westermann, Cohen, & Trompeter, 2017), which has amplified the need for negative feedback. However, audit supervisors struggle with how to deliver the “tough message” (i.e., negative feedback) in this environment, worrying that some form of subordinate retaliation or turnover will occur (Kornberger, Justesen, & Mouritsen, 2011; Westermann et al., 2015). This is consistent with criticism by regulators that the review process may not be operating at an optimal level, as inspection findings show that supervisors are not appropriately evaluating and supervising auditor work (PCAOB, 2013; ASIC, 2014). The purpose of this paper is to further understanding of audit review by investigating subordinates’ reactions to feedback sign (negative or positive) in the real-world audit review context, and examining whether specific person and task characteristics moderate those reactions.

  • اشتراک گذاری در

دیدگاه خود را بنویسید:

تاکنون دیدگاهی برای این نوشته ارسال نشده است

واکنش های مدیران متقاضیان حسابرسی به بازخورد
نوشته های مرتبط
مقالات جدید
لوگوی رسانه های برخط

logo-samandehi

پیوندها