|
Based on your IP address, your paper is being delivered by:
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
New York, USA
Processing request.
|
Illinois, USA
Processing request.
|
Brussels, Belgium
Processing request.
|
Seoul, Korea
Processing request.
|
California, USA
Processing request.
|
If you have any problems downloading this paper, please click on another Download Location above, or
File name: SSRN-id2065451. ; Size: 729K
|
|
The Role of Firm Status in Appointments of Financial Experts to Audit Committees
David H. Erkens University of Southern California - Leventhal School of Accounting
Sarah E. Bonner University of Southern California
May 23, 2012
Accounting Review, Forthcoming
Abstract:
Since 1999 regulators have attempted to improve the monitoring of financial reporting by exerting significant pressure on firms to appoint accounting financial experts (AFEs) to their audit committees. Yet, many firms have been reluctant to do so, which has made these firms more prone to financial reporting problems. We examine appointments of AFEs to the audit committees of S&P 1500 firms during the period 1999-2008 to explore whether concerns about the status of these experts discouraged firms from appointing them. We find that typical AFEs (CFOs and retired audit partners) have lower director status (board seats, trusteeships, social club memberships, and elite education) than other types of directors, and that this status gap is greater for higher status firms (larger, better connected, and more admired firms). Moreover, we find that higher status firms are less likely to appoint AFEs, suggesting that status-related concerns reduce the demand for accounting financial expertise on audit committees.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 50
Keywords: audit committees, financial experts, firm status, director status
JEL Classification: M41, G38
Accepted Paper Series
Download This Paper
Date posted: October 14, 2011
; Last revised: May 26, 2012
Suggested CitationErkens, David H. and Bonner, Sarah E., The Role of Firm Status in Appointments of Financial Experts to Audit Committees (May 23, 2012). Accounting Review, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1943648 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1943648
|
| Feedback to SSRN (Beta) |
|
|
People who downloaded this paper also downloaded:
1.
A Framework for Research on Corporate Accountability Reporting
By
Karthik Ramanna
2.
Did SOX Fully Address Audit Committee Oversight?: An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Equity on Audit Committee Independence
By
John Campbell,
James Hansen, ...
3.
A Review of Empirical Capital Structure Research and Directions for the Future
By
John Graham
and
Mark Leary
4.
Audit Committee Expertise and Financial Analysts’ and Investors’ Ability to Anticipate Future Earnings
By
John Abernathy,
Tony Kang, ...
5.
Monitoring the Monitors: How Shareholders and Boards Discipline
Ineffective Audit Committee Members and Those Who Serve With Them
By
Steven Kachelmeier,
Stephanie Rasmussen, ...
6.
A Descriptive Study of Factors Associated with the Internal Audit Function Having an Impact: Comparisons between Organizations in a Developed and an Emerging Economy
By
Audrey Gramling,
Irem Nuhoglu, ...
7.
Audit Committee Characteristics and the Safeguarding of Auditor Independence
By
Ling Lisic
and
Jian Zhou
8.
Audit Quality: The Role of Board Structure in Family Firms
By
Mervi Niskanen,
Jukka Karjalainen, ...
9.
Evidence on the Trade-Off between Real Activities Manipulation and Accrual-Based Earnings Management
By
Amy Zang
10.
The Effects of Auditor Rotation, Professional Skepticism, and Interactions with Managers on Audit Quality
By
Kendall Bowlin,
Jessen Hobson, ...
|
|
|
|