The effects of fee pressure and client risk on audit seniors' time budget decisions

Auditing

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 70-86

  Houston, Richard W ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Audit planning; Audit time budgets; Auditor judgments; Client risk; Fee pressure

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039372664     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.1999.18.2.70     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1987. The Commission on Auditors' Responsibilities: Report, Recommendations and Conclusions. New York, NY: AICPA.
2. _. 1997. Codification of Statements on Auditing Standards. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. Arens, A. A., and J. K. Loebbecke. 1994. Auditing: An Integrated Approach. 6th edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
4. Biggs, S. F., T. J. Mock, and P. R. Watkins. 1988. Auditor's use of analytical review in audit program design. The Accounting Review 63 (1): 148-161.
5. Brown, C., and I. Solomon. 1992. Auditors' judgments under time pressure: An agenda for research and an illustration. In Auditing Symposium XI: Proceedings of the 1992 Deloitte and Touche-University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, edited by R. Srivastava, 73-91. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
6. Brumfield, C. A., R. K. Elliott, and P. D. Jacobson. 1983. Business risk and the audit process. Journal of Accountancy (April): 60-68.
7. Cohen, J., and T. Kida. 1989. The impact of analytical review results, internal control reliability, and experience on auditors' use of analytical review. Journal of Accounting Research 27 (2): 263-276.
8. Cook, E., and T. Kelley. 1988. Auditor stress and time budgets. The CPA Journal (July): 83-86.
9. Copley, P. A., M. S. Doucet, and K. M. Gaver. 1994. A simultaneous equations analysis of quality control review outcomes and engagement fees for audits of recipients of federal financial assistance. The Accounting Review 69 (January): 244-256.
10. Cuccia, A., K. Hackenbrack, and M. W. Nelson. 1995. The ability of professional standards to mitigate aggressive reporting. The Accounting Review 70 (April): 227-248.
11. DeZoort, F. T., and A. T. Lord. 1997 A review and synthesis of pressure effects research in accounting. Journal of Accounting Literature: 28-85.
12. Dirsmith, M. W., and M. A. Covaleski. 1985. Informal communications, nonformal communications and mentoring in public accounting firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society 10 (2): 149-169.
13. _, J. B. Heian, and M. A. Covaleski. 1992. An institutional theory of perspective of control, power and loose coupling within international public accounting firms. Working paper, Pennsylvania State University.
14. Emby, C., and L. Etherington. 1993. Performance evaluation of auditors: A comparative study. Working Paper, Simon Fraser University.
15. Fleming, M. K. 1980. Budgeting practices in large CPA firms. The Journal of Accountancy (May): 55-62.
16. Fogarty, T. J. 1989. Audit performance: An empirical synthesis of three theoretical explanations. Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.
17. Frazer, J. D. 1987. Performance evaluation of auditors: The importance of time-budget pressure through a focus on the evaluator. Doctoral dissertation, Temple University.
18. Gibbins, M., and J. D. Newton. 1994. An empirical exploration of complex accountability in public accounting. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (2): 165-186.
19. Gramling, A. A. 1997. External auditors' reliance on internal auditors: Do client and partner preferences influence audit managers' decisions? Working paper, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
20. Greene, R., and K. Barrett. 1994. Auditing the accounting firms. Financial World (September 27): 30-34.
21. Hackenbrack, K., and M. W. Nelson. 1996. Auditors' incentives and their application of financial accounting standards. The Accounting Review 71 (January): 43-59.
22. Hill, J. W., M. B. Metzger, and J. G. Wermert. 1994. The spectre of disproportionate auditor liability in the savings and loan crisis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 5: 133-177.
23. Holder, W. W. 1983. Analytical review procedures in planning the audit: An application study. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 2 (2): 100-107.
24. Joyce, E. J. 1976. Expert judgment in audit program planning. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 29-60.
25. Jiambalvo, J. 1979. Performance evaluation and directed job effort: Model development and analysis in a CPA firm setting. Journal of Accounting Research 17 (2): 436-455.
26. Kachelmeier, S. J., and W. F. Messier, Jr. 1990. An investigation of the influence of a nonstatistical decision aid on auditor sample size decisions. The Accounting Review 65 (1): 209-226.
27. Kaplan, S. E. 1985. An examination of the effects of environment and explicit internal control evaluation on planned audit hours. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 5 (1): 12-25.
28. Kelley, T., and L. Margheim. 1987. The effect of audit billing arrangement on underreporting of time and audit quality reduction acts. Advances in Accounting 5: 221-233.
29. Kermis, G. F., and S. Mahapatra. 1985. An empirical study of the effects of time pressure on audit time allocations. Advances in Accounting 2: 261-273.
30. Kida, T. 1984. Performance evaluation and review meeting characteristics in public accounting firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society 9 (2): 137-147.
31. Killough, L., and C. Ho. 1985. The race is on - Has competition changed the accounting profession. The National Public Accountant 30 (12): 20-24.
32. Kirk, R. E. 1982. Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edition. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
33. Lightner, S. M., S. J. Adams, and K. M. Lightner. 1982. The influence of situational, ethical, and expectancy variables on accountants' underreporting behavior. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 2 (1): 1-12.
34. _, J. L. Leisenring, and A. J. Winters. 1983. Underreporting chargeable time: Its effect on client billing, future budget preparation and staff evaluation and scheduling. Journal of Accountancy (January): 52-57.
35. Lord, A. T. 1992. Pressure: A methodological consideration for behavioral research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 11 (2): 89-108.
36. Margheim, L., and T. Kelley. 1992. The perceived effects of fixed fee audit billing arrangements. Accounting Horizons 6 (4): 62-75.
37. Marxen, D. 1990. A behavioral investigation of time budget preparation in a competitive audit environment. Accounting Horizons 4 (2): 47-57.
38. McNair, C. J. 1991. Proper compromises: The management control dilemma in public accounting and its impact on auditor behavior. Accounting, Organizations and Society 16(7): 635-653.
39. Mock, T. J., and A. Wright. 1993. An exploratory study of auditors' evidential planning judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12 (2): 39-61.
40. National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (NCFFR) (the Treadway Commission). 1987. Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
41. O'Keefe, T. B., R. D. King, and K. M. Gaver. 1994. Audit fees, industry specialization, and compliance with GAAS reporting standards. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 13 (2): 40-55.
42. O'Reilly, V. M., M. B. Hirsch, P. L. DeFliese, and H. R. Jaenicke. 1990. Montgomery's Auditing. 11th edition. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
43. Palmrose, Z-V. 1989. The relation of audit contract type to audit fees and hours. The Accounting Review 64 (July): 488-499.
44. Peecher, M. E. 1996. The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 34 (1): 125-140.
45. Pratt, J., and J. D. Stice. 1994. The effects of client characteristics on auditor litigation risk judgements, required audit evidence, and recommended audit fees. The Accounting Review 69 (October): 639-656.
46. Prawitt, D. F. 1995. Staffing assignments for judgment-oriented audit tasks: The effects of structured audit technology and environment. The Accounting Review 70 (July): 443-465.
47. _, W. L. Felix, Jr., and B. C. Spilker. 1998. The effects of structure and environment on human resource allocation in auditing. Working paper, Brigham Young University.
48. Public Oversight Board (POB). 1993. In the Public Interest: A Special Report by the Public Oversight Board of the SEC Practice Section, AICPA. New York, NY: AICPA.
49. Quilliam, W. C. 1993. Examining the effects of accountability on auditors' valuation decisions. Working paper, University of South Florida.
50. Stice, J. D. 1991. Using financial and market information to identify pre-engagement factors associated with lawsuits against auditors. The Accounting Review 66 (3): 516-533.
51. Waggoner, J. B., and J. D. Cashell. 1991. The impact of time pressure on auditors' performance. The Ohio CPA Journal (Jan-Feb/Mar-Apr): 27-32.
52. Wallace, W. A. 1991. Auditing. 2nd edition. Boston, MA: PWS-Kent Publishing Company.
53. Walo, J. C. 1995. The effects of auditor's business risk on audit scope. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 14 (1): 115-124.
54. Young, S. M. 1985. Participative budgeting: The effects of risk aversion and asymmetric information on budgetary slack. Journal of Accounting Research 23 (2): 829-842.
55. _, and B. Lewis. 1995. Experimental incentive-contracting research in management accounting. In Judgment and Decision Making Research in Accounting and Auditing, edited by R. H. Ashton, and A. H. Ashton. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
56. Yunich, R. H. 1983. Planning for more efficient and effective audits. The Practical Accountant 16 (9): 45-52.