Measuring productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency changes of CPA firms prior to, and following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Socio-Economic Planning Sciences

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 221-228

  Chang, Hsihui ^a   Choy, Hiu Lam ^a   Cooper, William W ^b   Parker, Barnett R ^c   Ruefli, Timothy W ^b  

^a DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^c Pfeiffer University   (United States)

Author keywords

Big 4 firms; CPA firms; DEA; Efficiency change; Malmquist index; Productivity growth; SOX; Technical progress

Indexed keywords

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT; PRODUCTIVITY; SERVICE SECTOR; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 67849122783     PISSN: 00380121     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2008.11.002     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Chang H., Choy H., Cooper W.W., and Lin M. How has the Sarbanes-Oxley act affected CPA Firm fee productivity? Working paper (2007), University of Texas at Austin
2. Levitt A. Renewing the covenant with investors (May, 10, 2000), Speech at The New York University Center for Law and Business, New York
3. Banker R.D., Chang H., and Natarajan R. Productivity change, technical progress and relative efficiency change in the public accounting industry. Management Science 51 (2005) 291-304
4. Financial Executives International. Sarbanes-Oxley compliance costs exceed estimates. Press Release: March 21, 2005.
5. Dopuch N., King R., and Schwartz R. Independence in appearance and fact: an experimental investigation. Contemporary Accounting Research 20 (2003) 79-114
6. Simunic D. Auditing, consulting, and auditor independence. Journal of Accounting Research 22 (1984) 679-702
7. Whisenant S., Sankaraguruswamy S., and Raghunandan K. Evidence on the joint determination of audit and non-audit fees. Journal of Accounting Research 41 (2003) 721-744
8. Davis L.R., Ricchiute D., and Trompeter G. Audit effort, audit fees, and the provision of nonaudit services to audit clients. The Accounting Review 68 (1993) 135-150
9. Simunic D. The pricing of audit services: theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 18 (1980) 161-190
10. Francis J., and Stokes D. Audit prices, product differentiation and scale economies: further evidence from the Australian market. Journal of Accounting Research 24 (1986) 383-393
11. Lai K.W. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and auditor independence: preliminary evidence from audit opinion and discretionary accruals. Working paper (2003), City University of Hong Kong
12. Griffin P., and Lont D. An analysis of audit fees following the passage of Sarbanes-Oxley. Working paper (2005), University of California, Davis, CA
13. Raghunandan K., and Rama D. SOX Section 404 material weakness disclosures and audit fees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 25 (2006) 99-114
14. Fusco CR. Accounting for the accountants. The Conference Board Review, March/April, 2007, p. 7.
15. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 3 (1978) 424-444
16. Banker R.D., Charnes A., and Cooper W.W. Some models for estimating technical and scale efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 30 (1984) 1078-1092
17. Cooper W.W., Seiford L.M., and Tone K. Data envelopment analysis, a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-Solver software. 2nd ed. (2007), Springer Science-Business Media, Inc, New York
18. Emrouznejad A., Parker B.R., and Tavares G. Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: a survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 42 3 (2008) 151-157
19. Shephard R.W. Theory and cost of production functions (1970), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
20. Banker R.D. Maximum likelihood, consistency and data envelopment analysis: a statistical foundation. Management Science 39 (1993) 1265-1273
21. O'Keefe T.B., Simunic D.A., and Stein M.T. The production of audit services: evidence from a major public accounting firm. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (1994) 241-261
22. Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor, http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/ppi_nr.htm.
23. Hood D. The year of merging vigorously. Accounting Today 4 (2005)
24. Färe R., and Grosskopf S. Intertemporal production frontiers: with dynamic DEA (1996), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
25. Craswell A., Francis J.R., and Taylor L. Auditor brand name reputations and industry specializations. Journal of Accounting and Economics 20 (1995) 297-322
26. Prentice R.A., and Spence D.B. Sarbanes-Oxley as quack corporate governance. Georgetown Law Review (2008)
27. Prentice R.A. Sarbanes-Oxley: the evidence regarding the impact of SOX. 404. Cardozo Law Review 29 (2007) 703-763
28. Doidge C., Karolyi G.A., and Stulz H. Has New York become less competitive in global markets? Evaluating foreign listing choices over time. Working paper 13079 (2008), National Bureau of Economic Research, New York