This study explores the effects of partnership disparity within Chinese audit firms on audit quality using novel data on their partnership arrangements. The results indicate a U-shaped relationship between the partnership disparity extent and the violations assessed by regulators, including financial misstatements of clients. Audit firms with mid-level unequal partnership structures achieve superior audit quality than their counterparts with either “flat” or “high-skewed” partnership structures. Additional analyses confirm the role of client complexity as the boundary condition and indicate that the geographical remoteness of audit firms asymmetrically moderates partnership disparity. These results are robust to different audit quality proxies and alternative research designs including change analyses and after controlling for the effects of engagement partners. This study contributes to research on diversity and performance in the partnership context. This approach opens the “black box” of power-related culture in audit firms and carries managerial implications for the managing partners and audit regulators of audit firms.
AndiolaL. M.DowneyD. H.WestermannK. D. (2020). Examining climate and culture in audit firms: Insights, practice implications, and future research directions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 39(4), 1–29.
2.
AranyaN.FerrisK. R. (1984). A reexamination of accountants’ organizational-professional conflict. The Accounting Review, 59(1), 1–15.
3.
BeckM. J.GunnJ. L.HallmanN. (2019). The geographic decentralization of audit firms and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 68(1), 101234.
4.
BeckerC. L.DeFondM. L.JiambalvoJ.SubramanyamK. R. (1998). The effect of audit quality on earnings management. Contemporary Accounting Research, 15(1), 1–24.
5.
BloomM. (1999). The performance effects of pay dispersion on individuals and organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 25–40.
6.
BundersonJ. S.ReagansR. E. (2011). Power, status, and learning in organizations. Organization Science, 22, 323–340.
7.
BundersonJ. S.Van der VegtG. S. (2018). Diversity and inequality in management teams: A review and integration of research on vertical and horizontal member differences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 47–73.
8.
CameranM.DitilloA.PettinicchioA. (2018). Audit team attributes matter: How diversity affects audit quality. European Accounting Review, 27(4), 595–621.
9.
ChangH.GuoY.MoP. L. L. (2019). Market competition, audit fee stickiness, and audit quality: Evidence from China. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 38(2), 79–99.
10.
ChenH.ChenJ. Z.LoboG. J.WangY. (2011). Effects of audit quality on earnings management and cost of equity capital: Evidence from China. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(3), 892–925.
11.
CleggS. R.CourpassonD.PhillipsN. (2006). Power and organizations. Pine Forge Press.
12.
DeAngeloL. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183–199.
13.
DeFondM.ZhangJ. (2014). A review of archival auditing research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 58(2–3), 275–326.
14.
DekeyserS.GaeremynckA.KnechelW. R.WillekensM. (2021). The impact of partners’ economic incentives on audit quality in Big 4 partnerships. The Accounting Review, 96(6), 129–152.
15.
DownarB.ErnstbergerJ.KochC. (2021). Determinants and consequences of auditor dyad formation at the top level of audit teams. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 89, 101156.
16.
EckardtR.SkaggsB. C.LepakD. P. (2018). An examination of the firm-level performance impact of cluster hiring in knowledge-intensive firms. Academy of Management Journal, 61(3), 919–944.
17.
EisenhardtK. M.BourgeoisL. J. (1988). Politics of strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 737–770.
18.
EllingtonJ. K.DierdorffE. C.RubinR. S. (2014). Decelerating the diminishing returns of citizenship on task performance: The role of social context and interpersonal skill. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 748–758.
19.
ErnstbergerJ.KochC.SchreiberE. M.TrompeterG. (2020). Are audit firms’ compensation policies associated with audit quality?Contemporary Accounting Research, 37(1), 218–244.
FirthM.MoP.WongR. M. K. (2012). Auditors’ organizational form, legal liability, and reporting conservatism: Evidence from China. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(1), 57–93.
22.
GreerL. L.de JongB. A.SchoutenM. E.DannalsJ. E. (2018). Why and when hierarchy impacts team effectiveness: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(6), 591–613.
23.
GuanY.SuL. N.WuD.YangZ. (2016). Do school ties between auditors and client executives influence audit outcomes?Journal of Accounting and Economics, 61(2–3), 506–525.
24.
GunnJ.LiC.LiaoL.ZhouS. (2023). Is it better to kill two birds with one stone? Internal control audit quality and audit costs for integrated vs. non-integrated audits. The Accounting Review, 98(1), 251–283.
25.
HalevyN.ChouE. Y.GalinskyA. D. (2011). A functional model of hierarchy: Why, how, and when vertical differentiation enhances group performance. Organizational Psychology Review, 1, 32–52.
26.
HallM.TidemanN. (1967). Measures of concentration. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 62(317), 162–168.
27.
HarrisonD. A.KleinK. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199–1228.
28.
HeC.LiC. K.MonroeG. S.SiY. (2021). Diversity of signing auditors and audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 40(3), 27–52.
29.
HeK.PanX.TianG. (2017). Legal liability, government intervention, and auditor behavior: Evidence from structural reform of audit firms in China. European Accounting Review, 26(1), 61–95.
30.
HuangH. W.RaghunandanK.HuangT. C.ChiouJ. R. (2015). Fee discounting and audit quality following audit firm and audit partner changes: Chinese evidence. The Accounting Review, 90(4), 1517–1546.
31.
JensenM. C.MecklingW. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
32.
JiX. D.LuW.QuW. (2017). Voluntary disclosure of internal control weakness and earnings quality: Evidence from China. The International Journal of Accounting, 52(1), 27–44.
33.
KothariS. P.LeoneA. J.WasleyC. E. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39(1), 163–197.
34.
LennoxC. S.LiB. (2012). The consequences of protecting audit partners’ personal assets from the threat of liability. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 54(2–3), 154–173.
35.
LennoxC. S.WangC.WuX. (2020). Opening up the “Black Box” of audit firms: The effects of audit partner ownership on audit adjustments. Journal of Accounting Research, 58(5), 1299–1341.
36.
LennoxC. S.WuX. (2018). A review of the archival literature on audit partners. Accounting Horizons, 32(2), 1–35.
37.
LennoxC. S.WuX. (2022). Mandatory internal control audits, audit adjustments, and financial reporting quality: Evidence from China. The Accounting Review, 97(1), 341–364.
38.
LoA. W.LinK. Z.WongR. M. (2022). Does availability of audit partners affect audit quality? Evidence from China. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 37(2), 407–439.
39.
LoboG. J.PaugamL.ZhangD.CastaJ. F. (2017). The effect of joint auditor pair composition on audit quality: Evidence from impairment tests. Contemporary Accounting Research, 34(1), 118–153.
40.
MaisterD. (1993). Managing the professional service firm. Simon & Schuster.
41.
MowchanM. (2016). Office managing partners, non-audit services, and audit quality [Working paper]. Arizona State University.
42.
NarayananV. G. (1995). Moral hazard in repeated professional partnerships. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2), 895–917.
43.
PrattJ.BeaulieuP. (1992). Organizational culture in public accounting: Size, technology, rank, and functional area. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(7), 667–684.
44.
ProellC. A.ZhouY. D.NelsonM. W. (2022). It’s not only what you say… How communication style and team culture affects audit issue follow-up and auditor performance evaluations. The Accounting Review, 97(2), 373–395.
45.
RenY.ChenJ.RiedlJ. (2016). The impact and evolution of group diversity in online open collaboration. Management Science, 62(6), 1668–1686.
46.
RobersonQ.HolmesO., IVPerryJ. L. (2017). Transforming research on diversity and firm performance: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 189–216.
47.
SamuelsD.TaylorD. J.VerrecchiaR. E. (2021). The economics of misreporting and the role of public scrutiny. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 71(1), 101340.
48.
TostL. P.GinoR.LarrickR. P. (2013). When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1465–1486.
49.
TrevorC. O.ReillyG.GerhartB. (2012). Reconsidering pay dispersion’s effect on the performance of interdependent work: Reconciling sorting and pay inequality. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 585–610.
50.
TrotmanK. T.BauerT. D.HumphreysK. A. (2015). Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 47, 56–72.
51.
von NordenflychtA. (2010). What is a professional service firm? Toward a theory and taxonomy of knowledge-intensive firms. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 155–174.
52.
WangQ.WongT. J.XiaL. (2008). State ownership, the institutional environment, and auditor choice: Evidence from China. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 46(1), 112–134.
53.
WeigeltC.SarkarM. B. (2009). Learning from supply-side agents: The impact of technology solution providers’ experiential diversity on clients’ innovation adoption. Academy of Management Journal, 52(1), 37–60.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
