IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/rqfnac/v62y2024i3d10.1007_s11156-023-01238-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Breaking the Big Four brand’s halo effect precisely: evidence from the association between RMM coverage ratios and integrated audit effectiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Dong Drew Li

    (McMurry University)

  • Wenguang Lin

    (Western Connecticut State University)

  • Pei-Yu Sun

    (South Dakota State University)

  • Yunshu Tang

    (Hefei University of Technology)

  • Zheng Cheng

    (University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee)

Abstract

This research examines what proportion of Big Four auditors underperform in integrated audit settings and why. Incorporating the inverse relation between detection risk and assessed risk of material misstatement (RMM) per the classic audit risk model, we create an RMM coverage ratio to measure how many times the total audit effort expended covers pre-existing RMM—the higher the ratio, the larger the margin for errors. We then partition the RMM coverage ratios in each industry into Deciles (0–9). Empirical analyses corroborate that, given the risk-based audit approach strictly executed, only the Big Four auditors of higher Deciles (2–9) increase the likelihood of integrated audit effectiveness. This evidence indicates that due to a small margin for errors (e.g., RMM coverage ratios ≤ 2.31), 20% of Big Four auditors are less likely to adequately assess or address risks to deliver an engagement, breaking the Big Four brand’s halo effect precisely.

Suggested Citation

  • Dong Drew Li & Wenguang Lin & Pei-Yu Sun & Yunshu Tang & Zheng Cheng, 2024. "Breaking the Big Four brand’s halo effect precisely: evidence from the association between RMM coverage ratios and integrated audit effectiveness," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 1291-1328, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:62:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11156-023-01238-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11156-023-01238-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11156-023-01238-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11156-023-01238-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy B. Bell & Wayne R. Landsman & Douglas A. Shackelford, 2001. "Auditors' Perceived Business Risk and Audit Fees: Analysis and Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 35-43, June.
    2. Deborah S. Archambeault & F. Todd Dezoort & Dana R. Hermanson, 2008. "Audit Committee Incentive Compensation and Accounting Restatements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 965-992, December.
    3. Hart, Oliver, 1995. "Corporate Governance: Some Theory and Implications," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(430), pages 678-689, May.
    4. Degeorge, Francois & Patel, Jayendu & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1999. "Earnings Management to Exceed Thresholds," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(1), pages 1-33, January.
    5. Sattar A. Mansi & William F. Maxwell & Darius P. Miller, 2004. "Does Auditor Quality and Tenure Matter to Investors? Evidence from the Bond Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 755-793, September.
    6. Bengt Holmstrom, 1982. "Moral Hazard in Teams," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 324-340, Autumn.
    7. Bartov, Eli & Givoly, Dan & Hayn, Carla, 2002. "The rewards to meeting or beating earnings expectations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 173-204, June.
    8. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    9. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    10. Dye, Ronald A., 1991. "Informationally motivated auditor replacement," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 347-374, December.
    11. Bengt Holmstrom, 1979. "Moral Hazard and Observability," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 74-91, Spring.
    12. Donovan, John & Frankel, Richard & Lee, Joshua & Martin, Xiumin & Seo, Hojun, 2014. "Issues raised by studying DeFond and Zhang: What should audit researchers do?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 327-338.
    13. Jere R. Francis & Paul N. Michas & Michael D. Yu, 2013. "Office Size of Big 4 Auditors and Client Restatements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 1626-1661, December.
    14. Karla M. Johnstone & Jean C. Bedard, 2004. "Audit Firm Portfolio Management Decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 659-690, September.
    15. David C. Hay & W. Robert Knechel & Norman Wong, 2006. "Audit Fees: A Meta†analysis of the Effect of Supply and Demand Attributes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 141-191, March.
    16. (Xuefeng) Jiang, John & Petroni, Kathy R. & Yanyan Wang, Isabel, 2010. "CFOs and CEOs: Who have the most influence on earnings management?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 513-526, June.
    17. Mark L. Defond & Clive S. Lennox, 2017. "Do PCAOB Inspections Improve the Quality of Internal Control Audits?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 591-627, June.
    18. Kothari, S.P. & Leone, Andrew J. & Wasley, Charles E., 2005. "Performance matched discretionary accrual measures," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 163-197, February.
    19. Antle, R & Nalebuff, B, 1991. "Conservatism And Auditor-Client Negotiations," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29, pages 31-54.
    20. Rani Hoitash & Udi Hoitash & Karla M. Johnstone, 2012. "Internal Control Material Weaknesses and CFO Compensation," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 768-803, September.
    21. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    22. Ball, Ray & Jayaraman, Sudarshan & Shivakumar, Lakshmanan, 2012. "Audited financial reporting and voluntary disclosure as complements: A test of the Confirmation Hypothesis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 136-166.
    23. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1995. "Size and Book-to-Market Factors in Earnings and Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(1), pages 131-155, March.
    24. Ashbaugh-Skaife, Hollis & Collins, Daniel W. & Kinney Jr., William R., 2007. "The discovery and reporting of internal control deficiencies prior to SOX-mandated audits," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 166-192, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. Mark DeFond & David H. Erkens & Jieying Zhang, 2017. "Do Client Characteristics Really Drive the Big N Audit Quality Effect? New Evidence from Propensity Score Matching," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3628-3649, November.
    3. Bryan, David B., 2017. "Organized labor, audit quality, and internal control," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 11-26.
    4. Ji, Xu-dong & Lu, Wei & Qu, Wen, 2018. "Internal control risk and audit fees: Evidence from China," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 266-287.
    5. Steven Lustgarten & John Shon, 2013. "Do abnormal accruals affect the life expectancy of audit engagements?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 443-466, April.
    6. Guangming Gong & Liang Xiao & Si Xu & Xun Gong, 2019. "Do Bond Investors Care About Engagement Auditors’ Negative Experiences? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 779-806, September.
    7. Sharad Asthana & Inder Khurana & K. K. Raman, 2019. "Fee competition among Big 4 auditors and audit quality," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 403-438, February.
    8. Inder K. Khurana & Nathan G. Lundstrom & K. K. Raman, 2021. "PCAOB Inspections and the Differential Audit Quality Effect for Big 4 and Non–Big 4 US Auditors," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 376-411, March.
    9. Goergen, Marc & Manjon, Miguel C. & Renneboog, Luc, 2008. "Recent developments in German corporate governance," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 175-193, September.
    10. Jingyu Yang & Hai Wu & Yangxin Yu, 2021. "Distracted institutional investors and audit risk," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(3), pages 3855-3881, September.
    11. Bushman, Robert M. & Smith, Abbie J., 2001. "Financial accounting information and corporate governance," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 237-333, December.
    12. Chen, Tai-Yuan & Zhang, Guochang & Zhou, Yi, 2018. "Enforceability of non-compete covenants, discretionary investments, and financial reporting practices: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 41-60.
    13. Daniel Aobdia & Luminita Enache & Anup Srivastava, 2021. "Changes in Big N auditors’ client selection and retention strategies over time," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 715-754, February.
    14. Li‐Chin Jennifer Ho & Chao‐Shin Liu & Thomas Schaefer, 2010. "Audit tenure and earnings surprise management," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 116-138, May.
    15. Armstrong, Christopher S. & Guay, Wayne R. & Weber, Joseph P., 2010. "The role of information and financial reporting in corporate governance and debt contracting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 179-234, December.
    16. Brandon Gipper & Luzi Hail & Christian Leuz, 2017. "On the Economics of Audit Partner Tenure and Rotation: Evidence from PCAOB Data," NBER Working Papers 24018, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Wen, Fenghua & Chen, Meng & Zhang, Yun & Miao, Xiao, 2023. "Oil price uncertainty and audit fees: Evidence from the energy industry," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    18. Yang, Seunghee & Lee, Woo-Jong & Lim, Youngdeok & Yi, Cheong H., 2021. "Audit firm operating leverage and pricing strategy: Evidence from lowballing in audit industry," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    19. Dang, Man & Puwanenthiren, Premkanth & Truong, Cameron & Henry, Darren & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2022. "Audit quality and seasoned equity offerings methods," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    20. Aobdia, Daniel, 2019. "Do practitioner assessments agree with academic proxies for audit quality? Evidence from PCAOB and internal inspections," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 144-174.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Halo effect; RMM coverage ratio; Margin for errors; The integrated audit; Risk-based audit approach; Partial mediation analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing
    • M48 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:62:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11156-023-01238-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.