Shifting styles: Do auditor performance levels influence the review process?

Abstract

We examine communication behaviors during the audit review process using a survey of audit partners, managers, and in‐charge/senior associates from each Big 4 accounting firm and one international accounting firm. We inquire about reviewers' preferred communication style when discussing review notes with preparers of varying performance levels, their likelihood of taking over the audit work of preparers due to either a lack of a response or an inappropriate response to a review note, and their propensity to self‐correct preparers' documentation along with the reasons for doing so instead of leaving a review note. Consistent with expectations, results indicate that reviewers are more likely to discuss review notes face to face with below‐average‐performing subordinates than with above‐average‐performing subordinates, and instead use alternative forms of communication with above‐average performers. Further, we find that reviewers self‐correct and/or update documentation themselves more frequently for below‐average subordinates than for above‐average subordinates. Supplemental analysis reveals that reviewers are likely to revise the work of subordinates, whether below average or above average, for a variety of reasons, including ease of doing so, efficiency, and pending deadlines.