Advertisement

Journal of Management & Governance

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 485–502 | Cite as

Audit committee perspectives on mandatory audit firm rotation: evidence from Canada

  • Richard Fontaine
  • Hanen Khemakhem
  • David N. Herda
Article

Abstract

This study examines audit committee (AC) members’ perspectives on mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR), mandatory audit partner rotation, ways in which ACs monitor auditor independence and objectivity, and the costs associated with switching audit firms. In-person interviews with AC members in Canada were conducted to improve our understanding of the reasons underlying AC members’ positions on MAFR. All AC members interviewed in this study were adamantly opposed to MAFR. MAFR was perceived as a threat to their shareholder-granted authority to make audit firm appointment decisions. Participants believe that their professional judgment and observations are the most effective means of ensuring auditor independence and view MAFR as an unnecessary intervention. We explain these results using self-determination theory. Our findings were also used to develop a conceptual model of AC relationships with external auditors and financial management.

Keywords

Mandatory audit firm rotation Audit committees Auditor independence Self-determination theory Canada 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Roberto Di Pietra (editor), our interview participants, and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. We are also grateful for the generous support provided by the Corporate Reporting Chair of the Accounting Department at the University of Quebec at Montreal. We would like to dedicate this article to our colleague and dear friend, Glenn Rioux. Thank you for your help Glenn, you will be truly missed.

References

  1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (1992). Statement of position: Regarding mandatory rotation of audit firms of publicly held companies. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Arruñada, B. (2000). Audit quality: attributes, private safeguards and the role of regulation. European Accounting Review, 9(2), 205–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arruñada, B. (2004). Audit failure and the crisis of auditing. European Business Organization Law Review, 5, 635–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BDO Seidman LLP (BDO). (2003). Comment letter on the SEC’s proposed rules on auditor independence. File No. S7-49-02. January 13. New York: BDO.Google Scholar
  5. Beasley, M., Carcello, J., Hermanson, D., & Neal, T. L. (2009). The audit committee oversight process. Contemporary Accounting Research, 26(1), 65–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boivie, S., Graffin, S., & Pollock, T. (2012). Time for me to fly: Predicting director exit at large firms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1334–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). (2012). Enhancing audit quality: Canadian perspectivesauditor independence. http://www.cica.ca/enhancing-audit-quality-canadian-perspective/item68293.pdf.
  8. Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB). (2013). Enhancing audit quality: Canadian perspectivesconclusions and recommendations. http://www.cica.ca/enhancing-audit-quality-canadian-perspective/item74564.pdf.
  9. Canadian Securities Administrators. (2004). National instrument 52-110 audit committees. Toronto: OSCB.Google Scholar
  10. Carcello, J. V., & Nagy, A. L. (2004). Audit firm tenure and fraudulent financial reporting. Auditing A Journal of Practice and Theory, 23(2), 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casterella, J. R., & Johnston, D. (2013). Can the academic literature contribute to the debate over mandatory audit firm rotation? Research in Accounting Regulation, 25(1), 108–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, C. Y., Lin, C. J., & Lin, Y. C. (2008). Audit partner tenure, audit firm tenure, and discretionary accruals: Does long auditor tenure impair earnings quality? Contemporary Accounting Research, 25, 415–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chi, W., Lisic, L. L., & Pevzner, M. (2011). Is enhanced audit quality associated with greater real earnings management? Accounting Horizons, 25(2), 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cohen, J., Krishnamoorthy, G., & Wright, A. (2010). Corporate governance in the post Sarbanes–Oxley era: Auditors’ experiences. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27(3), 751–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Creswell, J. (2003). Research design. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Daniels, B. W., & Booker, Q. (2011). The effects of audit firm rotation on perceived auditor independence and audit quality. Research in Accounting Regulation, 23, 78–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in Human behavior. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DeFond, M. L., & Francis, J. R. (2005). Audit research after Sarbanes–Oxley. Auditing A Journal of Practice and Theory, 24, 5–30.Google Scholar
  20. DeZoort, F. T., Hermanson, D. R., Archambeault, D., & Reed, S. (2002). Audit committee effectiveness: A synthesis of the empirical audit committee literature. Journal of Accounting Literature, 21, 38–75.Google Scholar
  21. Dobija, D. (2013). Exploring audit committee practices: Oversight of financial reporting and external auditors in Poland. Journal of Management and Governance, 1–31.Google Scholar
  22. Dopuch, N., King, R. R., & Schwartz, R. (2001). An experimental investigation of retention and rotation requirements. Journal of Accounting Research, 39(1), 93–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eun, C. S., & Sabherwal, S. (2003). Cross-border listings and price discovery: Evidence from US-listed Canadian stocks. The Journal of Finance, 58(2), 549–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fontaine, R., Letaifa, S. B., & Herda, D. N. (2013). An interview study to understand the reasons clients change audit firms and the client’s perceived value of the audit service. Current Issues in Auditing, 7(1), A1–A14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gavious, I. (2007). Alternative perspectives to deal with auditors’ agency problem. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18, 451–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Geiger, M. A., & Raghunandan, K. (2002). Auditor tenure and audit reporting failures. Auditing A Journal of Practice and Theory, 21(1), 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gendron, Y., Bedard, J., & Gosselin, M. (2004). Getting inside the black box: A field study of practices in “effective” audit committees. Auditng A Journal of Practice and Theory, 23(1), 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ghosh, A., & Moon, D. (2005). Auditor tenure and perceptions of audit quality. The Accounting Review, 80(2), 585–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Guerrero, S., Lapalme, M-E., & Séguin, M. (2014). Board chair authentic leadership and nonexecutives’ motivation and commitment. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 1–14.Google Scholar
  31. Herda, D. N., & Lavelle, J. J. (2013). Auditor commitment to privately held clients and its effect on value-added audit service. Auditing A Journal of Practice and Theory, 32(1), 113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1997). The Active Interview. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Jennings, M. M., Pany, K. J., & Reckers, P. M. J. (2006). Strong corporate governance and audit firm rotation: Effects on judges’ independence perceptions and litigation judgments. Accounting Horizons, 20(3), 253–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson, V. E., Khurana, I. K., & Reynolds, J. K. (2002). Audit-firm tenure and the quality of financial reports. Contemporary Accounting Research, 19(4), 637–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kaplan, S. E., & Mauldin, E. G. (2008). Auditor rotation and the appearance of independence: Evidence from non-professional investors. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 27(2), 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mitchell, A., & Sikka, P. (1993). Accounting for change: The institutions of accountancy. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 4, 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moore, D. A., Tetlock, P. E., Tanlu, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (2006). Conflicts of interest and the case of auditor independence: Moral seduction and strategic issue cycling. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 10–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Myers, J. N., Myers, L. A., & Omer, T. C. (2003). Exploring the term of the auditor-client relationship and the quality of earnings: A case for mandatory auditor rotation? The Accounting Review, 78(3), 779–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). (2011). Concept release on possible revisions to PCAOB standards related to reports on audited financial statements and related amendments to PCAOB standards: Notice of roundtable. http://pcaobus.org/Rules/Rulemaking/Docket034/Concept_Release.pdf.
  42. Sandino, T. (2007). Introducing the first management control systems: Evidence from the retail sector. The Accounting Review, 82(1), 265–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sikka, P., & Willmott, H. (1995). The power of “independence”: Defending and extending the jurisdiction of accounting in the United Kingdom. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(6), 547–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stefaniak, C. M., Robertson, J. C., & Houston, R. W. (2009). The causes and consequences of auditor switching: A review of the literature. Journal of Accounting Literature, 28, 47–121.Google Scholar
  45. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Sturges, J. E., & Hanrahan, K. J. (2004). Comparing telephone and face-to-face qualitative interviewing: A research note. Qualitative Research, 4(1), 107–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tysiac, K. (2014). Mandatory audit firm rotation rules published in EU. Journal of Accountancy http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/News/201410229.htm.
  48. U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO). (2003). Required study on the potential effects of mandatory audit firm rotation. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  49. Wang, K. J., & Tuttle, B. M. (2009). The impact of auditor rotation on auditor-client negotiation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(2), 222–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Fontaine
    • 1
  • Hanen Khemakhem
    • 1
  • David N. Herda
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of AccountingESG-UQAMMontrealCanada
  2. 2.College of BusinessNorth Dakota State UniversityFargoUSA

Personalised recommendations