The Effects of Executive Compensation Contracts and Auditor Effort on Pro Forma Reporting Decisions

Dirk E. Black, E. Black, Theodore E. Christensen
{"title":"The Effects of Executive Compensation Contracts and Auditor Effort on Pro Forma Reporting Decisions","authors":"Dirk E. Black, E. Black, Theodore E. Christensen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1312562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We investigate two potential deterrents of aggressive pro forma reporting. First, the design of compensation contracts can encourage managers to adopt either a short- or a long-term focus. While it is difficult to observe whether compensation contracts are tied directly to pro forma earnings numbers, we posit that managers with a short-term horizon are more likely to make aggressive pro forma exclusions than managers with a long-term focus. Second, auditor effort can discourage potentially misleading pro forma earnings adjustments. Consistent with our predictions, we find that when compensation contracts include a long-term performance plan, managers are less likely to make potentially misleading pro forma earnings adjustments. Similarly, we find some evidence of a negative association between auditor effort (as proxied by higher-than-normal audit fees) and potentially misleading earnings adjustments. Taken together, this evidence is consistent with the notion that the design of compensation contracts and auditor effort can significantly influence managers’ pro forma reporting decisions. The results also suggest that investors discount earnings information when opportunism is likely to motivate managers’ earnings adjustments. Moreover, when managers make aggressive earnings exclusions in the presence of safeguards that limit opportunistic behavior, investors appear to react even more negatively.","PeriodicalId":140847,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Corporate Law (Other) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERPN: Corporate Law (Other) (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1312562","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

We investigate two potential deterrents of aggressive pro forma reporting. First, the design of compensation contracts can encourage managers to adopt either a short- or a long-term focus. While it is difficult to observe whether compensation contracts are tied directly to pro forma earnings numbers, we posit that managers with a short-term horizon are more likely to make aggressive pro forma exclusions than managers with a long-term focus. Second, auditor effort can discourage potentially misleading pro forma earnings adjustments. Consistent with our predictions, we find that when compensation contracts include a long-term performance plan, managers are less likely to make potentially misleading pro forma earnings adjustments. Similarly, we find some evidence of a negative association between auditor effort (as proxied by higher-than-normal audit fees) and potentially misleading earnings adjustments. Taken together, this evidence is consistent with the notion that the design of compensation contracts and auditor effort can significantly influence managers’ pro forma reporting decisions. The results also suggest that investors discount earnings information when opportunism is likely to motivate managers’ earnings adjustments. Moreover, when managers make aggressive earnings exclusions in the presence of safeguards that limit opportunistic behavior, investors appear to react even more negatively.
高管薪酬合同和审计师努力对预估报告决策的影响
我们调查了积极形式报告的两个潜在威慑因素。首先,薪酬合同的设计可以鼓励管理者要么关注短期,要么关注长期。虽然很难观察薪酬合同是否与预估收益数字直接相关,但我们认为,目光短浅的经理比目光长远的经理更有可能采取激进的预估排除措施。其次,审计师的努力可以阻止可能具有误导性的预估收益调整。与我们的预测一致,我们发现,当薪酬合同包含长期绩效计划时,管理者不太可能做出可能具有误导性的预估收益调整。同样,我们发现一些证据表明,审计师的努力(以高于正常的审计费用为代表)与潜在的误导性盈余调整之间存在负相关。综上所述,这一证据与薪酬合同的设计和审计师的努力可以显著影响管理者的形式报告决策的概念是一致的。研究结果还表明,当机会主义可能激励经理人进行收益调整时,投资者会低估收益信息。此外,当基金经理在存在限制机会主义行为的保障措施的情况下积极排除收益时,投资者的反应似乎更为消极。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信