{"title":"审计事务所任期与感知审计质量:来自CEO激励合同的证据","authors":"Henri Akono","doi":"10.1108/raf-07-2018-0139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to examine how compensation committees perceive audit quality as indicated by audit firm tenure. Using the contracting weight attached to earnings and cash flows in chief executive officer (CEO) compensation as proxy for the compensation committee’s perception of audit quality, the study examines whether compensation committees perceive performance metric informativeness as being affected by auditor tenure.,The paper regresses CEO cash compensation on accounting-based performance metrics and on interactions between auditor tenure and accounting-based performance metrics while controlling for other factors previously shown to affect CEO pay. Auditor tenure is measured using continuous and dichotomous variables.,Auditor tenure is associated with a reduced (positive) weight on earnings (operating cash flows), which suggests lower perceived audit quality as tenure lengthens consistent with the auditor closeness argument. This relation is asymmetric, i.e. the negative effect of longer auditor tenure on incentive contracting is more pronounced for positive earnings. The results are robust to using CEO total compensation as the compensation measure, as well as using level and change specifications.,The inability to control for audit partner tenure in assessing the effect of audit firm tenure on incentive contracting and the potential endogeneity between auditor tenure choice and incentive contracting are the main limitations of this study. Given the lack of information on US audit partner tenure, the study could not control for the audit partner tenure issue. However, the study has attempted to mitigate the endogeneity issue by using a Heckman selection model that includes in the first-stage a regression of auditor tenure on various firm, performance measure and CEO-related governance characteristics, based on existing models (Li et al., 2010).,Compensation committees view auditor tenure as an indicator of accounting quality in setting CEO pay. Further, long auditor tenure is perceived as detrimental to financial reporting integrity, particularly when earnings numbers suggest positive managerial performance and innovations.,This study provides empirical evidence that auditor tenure matters in setting executive pay. Further, this study shows evidence on the link between auditor tenure and audit quality from an internal user’s perspective. Prior studies have focused either on external users (investors, creditors) or on the preparer (using measures such as discretionary accruals or meet/beat analysts’ forecasts or forecast guidance).","PeriodicalId":21152,"journal":{"name":"Review of Accounting and Finance","volume":"19 1","pages":"313-337"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/raf-07-2018-0139","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Audit firm tenure and perceived audit quality: evidence from CEO incentive contracts\",\"authors\":\"Henri Akono\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/raf-07-2018-0139\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper aims to examine how compensation committees perceive audit quality as indicated by audit firm tenure. Using the contracting weight attached to earnings and cash flows in chief executive officer (CEO) compensation as proxy for the compensation committee’s perception of audit quality, the study examines whether compensation committees perceive performance metric informativeness as being affected by auditor tenure.,The paper regresses CEO cash compensation on accounting-based performance metrics and on interactions between auditor tenure and accounting-based performance metrics while controlling for other factors previously shown to affect CEO pay. Auditor tenure is measured using continuous and dichotomous variables.,Auditor tenure is associated with a reduced (positive) weight on earnings (operating cash flows), which suggests lower perceived audit quality as tenure lengthens consistent with the auditor closeness argument. This relation is asymmetric, i.e. the negative effect of longer auditor tenure on incentive contracting is more pronounced for positive earnings. The results are robust to using CEO total compensation as the compensation measure, as well as using level and change specifications.,The inability to control for audit partner tenure in assessing the effect of audit firm tenure on incentive contracting and the potential endogeneity between auditor tenure choice and incentive contracting are the main limitations of this study. Given the lack of information on US audit partner tenure, the study could not control for the audit partner tenure issue. However, the study has attempted to mitigate the endogeneity issue by using a Heckman selection model that includes in the first-stage a regression of auditor tenure on various firm, performance measure and CEO-related governance characteristics, based on existing models (Li et al., 2010).,Compensation committees view auditor tenure as an indicator of accounting quality in setting CEO pay. Further, long auditor tenure is perceived as detrimental to financial reporting integrity, particularly when earnings numbers suggest positive managerial performance and innovations.,This study provides empirical evidence that auditor tenure matters in setting executive pay. Further, this study shows evidence on the link between auditor tenure and audit quality from an internal user’s perspective. Prior studies have focused either on external users (investors, creditors) or on the preparer (using measures such as discretionary accruals or meet/beat analysts’ forecasts or forecast guidance).\",\"PeriodicalId\":21152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Accounting and Finance\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"313-337\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/raf-07-2018-0139\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Accounting and Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/raf-07-2018-0139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Accounting and Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/raf-07-2018-0139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
本文的目的是研究薪酬委员会如何感知审计质量的审计事务所任期。利用首席执行官薪酬中与盈利和现金流相关的承包权重,作为薪酬委员会对审计质量感知的代理,该研究检验了薪酬委员会是否认为绩效指标的信息量受到审计师任期的影响。本文根据基于会计的绩效指标以及审计师任期与基于会计的绩效指标之间的相互作用,对CEO现金薪酬进行了回归,同时控制了之前显示的影响CEO薪酬的其他因素。审计师任期是用连续变量和二分类变量来衡量的。审计师的任期与盈余(经营性现金流量)的权重降低(正)相关,这表明随着任期的延长,审计质量的感知会降低,这与审计师的密切性论点一致。这种关系是不对称的,即较长的审计师任期对激励合同的负面影响对于正盈余更为明显。研究结果对CEO总薪酬作为薪酬度量,以及使用水平和变动规格具有鲁棒性。在评估审计事务所任期对激励性合同的影响时,无法控制审计合伙人任期以及审计师任期选择与激励性合同之间的潜在内生性是本研究的主要局限性。鉴于缺乏关于美国审计合伙人任期的信息,该研究无法控制审计合伙人任期问题。然而,该研究试图通过使用Heckman选择模型来缓解内生性问题,该模型基于现有模型,在第一阶段对不同公司的审计师任期、绩效指标和首席执行官相关的治理特征进行回归(Li et al., 2010)。薪酬委员会将审计师的任期视为制定CEO薪酬时会计质量的一个指标。此外,长期的审计师任期被认为不利于财务报告的完整性,特别是当盈利数字表明积极的管理绩效和创新时。本研究提供了经验证据,证明审计师的任期对高管薪酬的设定有影响。此外,本研究从内部使用者的角度显示了审计师任期与审计质量之间联系的证据。先前的研究要么集中在外部使用者(投资者、债权人),要么集中在编制者(使用诸如可自由支配的应计项目或达到/超过分析师预测或预测指导等措施)。
Audit firm tenure and perceived audit quality: evidence from CEO incentive contracts
This paper aims to examine how compensation committees perceive audit quality as indicated by audit firm tenure. Using the contracting weight attached to earnings and cash flows in chief executive officer (CEO) compensation as proxy for the compensation committee’s perception of audit quality, the study examines whether compensation committees perceive performance metric informativeness as being affected by auditor tenure.,The paper regresses CEO cash compensation on accounting-based performance metrics and on interactions between auditor tenure and accounting-based performance metrics while controlling for other factors previously shown to affect CEO pay. Auditor tenure is measured using continuous and dichotomous variables.,Auditor tenure is associated with a reduced (positive) weight on earnings (operating cash flows), which suggests lower perceived audit quality as tenure lengthens consistent with the auditor closeness argument. This relation is asymmetric, i.e. the negative effect of longer auditor tenure on incentive contracting is more pronounced for positive earnings. The results are robust to using CEO total compensation as the compensation measure, as well as using level and change specifications.,The inability to control for audit partner tenure in assessing the effect of audit firm tenure on incentive contracting and the potential endogeneity between auditor tenure choice and incentive contracting are the main limitations of this study. Given the lack of information on US audit partner tenure, the study could not control for the audit partner tenure issue. However, the study has attempted to mitigate the endogeneity issue by using a Heckman selection model that includes in the first-stage a regression of auditor tenure on various firm, performance measure and CEO-related governance characteristics, based on existing models (Li et al., 2010).,Compensation committees view auditor tenure as an indicator of accounting quality in setting CEO pay. Further, long auditor tenure is perceived as detrimental to financial reporting integrity, particularly when earnings numbers suggest positive managerial performance and innovations.,This study provides empirical evidence that auditor tenure matters in setting executive pay. Further, this study shows evidence on the link between auditor tenure and audit quality from an internal user’s perspective. Prior studies have focused either on external users (investors, creditors) or on the preparer (using measures such as discretionary accruals or meet/beat analysts’ forecasts or forecast guidance).