Audit Conflict: An Empirical Study of the Perceived Ability of Auditors to Resist Management Pressure
M. Knapp
Abstract:The objective of this study is to examine how certain contextual factors in auditor-client conflicts affect the perceived ability of auditors to resist client pressure. A review of the literature resulted in the identification of four factors hypothesized to affect sophisticated financial statement users' perceptions of audit conflict outcomes: nature of conflict issue, client's financial condition, provision of MAS by the audit firm, and the degree of competition in the audit services market. A full-factorial, repeated measures ANOVA experiment was conducted using senior loan officers as subjects. The results indicate that a client in good financial condition is perceived as being more likely to obtain its preferred outcome to an audit conflict than a client in poor financial condition. Clients are also viewed as being more likely to obtain their preferred resolution to a conflict when the conflict issue is not dealt with precisely by the technical standards. C ONFLICT between client management and the audit firm is apparently occurring with increasing frequency [Fried and Schiff, 1981, p. 327]. Conflicts having serious implications for the successful completion of the audit are commonly centered around such issues as the need to make adjustments to the financial statements, the propriety of the client's accounting principles, and the adequacy of financial statement disclosure. Recently, the realization that audit conflict is potentially a serious threat to the viability of the independent audit function has spurred the interest of both regulatory authorities and researchers. The Cohen Commission focused on this issue, stating: "Often, the independent auditor's task is to persuade people [management] to do precisely what they do not want to do" [AICPA, 1978, p. 105]. In some cases, however, the party doing the most effective persuading may be client management.' The apparent increasing trend of management attempts to influence its auditors' reporting behavior ' In a 1982 discussion of "audit failures," The Wall Street Journal [Morris, 19821 reported that clients often appear to be successful in coercing their auditors to go along with questionable accounting practices. This paper is based on my dissertation at the University of Oklahoma. I would like to thank the firm of Deloitte Haskins & Sells for funding my research and the following members of my committee for their advice and encouragement: Shane Moriarity, Robert Owens, Ned Schrems, Harold Grasmick, and especially my chairman, Bart Ward. The comments and assistance of Ted Mock, James Manegold, Skip Shockley, Doug Andrews, the Editor, and two anonymous reviewers are also gratefully
Business