argument regarding the persistence of the commercialistic
culture, post-Enron, within large public
accounting firms. Auditor independence would become,
as a result of commercialistic influence, a less
significant part of the public accountant’s mindset,
and the appropriateness of regulatory mechanisms
aimed at tightening the profession’s regulatory standards
of auditor independence would blur in the eyes
of the individual. More research is needed, however,
in order to investigate the behavioral consequences of
public accountants’ relatively lower degree of independence
commitment.
It is especially worth noting that the data indicates
that independence commitment in the Big Four
firms is significantly lower than that in the medium
and small size practices (H1b), while the medium size
firms have the highest independence commitment
responses among the three firm categories. Besides
commercialization, are there other unique characteristics
of the Big Four firms that may be responsible
for the difference? Do accountants in different firm
categories have different levels of contacts with peers
and with the profession’s core bodies of knowledge?
Are they socialized in different ways?
The findings regarding the positive, statistically
significant relationship between client and independence
commitment are particularly intriguing
(H1e) because auditing literature generally assumes
that the relationship between the two is negative.
That is, we found that public accountants with a
higher client commitment are more likely to
consider auditor independence as a prime feature of
public accounting which needs to be tightly regulated.
A potential reason that might explain this
result relates to the role of public accountants’
reflectivity in constructing independence commitment.
Influencing authors in the fields of sociology
and organizational analysis emphasize reflectivity as a
key feature of modern life, that is to say the individual’s
ability to reflect and act upon information
about different aspects of their personal or professional
life (e.g. Crozier and Friedberg, 1980;
Giddens, 1990). In this context, public accountants
with a higher client commitment may be more
reflectively sensitive about the potential negative
consequences ensuing from their client commitment
proclivity on auditor independence (consequences
which are often described in practitioner literature as
having the potential to imperil the long-term legit
argument regarding the persistence of the commercialisticculture, post-Enron, within large publicaccounting firms. Auditor independence would become,as a result of commercialistic influence, a lesssignificant part of the public accountant’s mindset,and the appropriateness of regulatory mechanismsaimed at tightening the profession’s regulatory standardsof auditor independence would blur in the eyesof the individual. More research is needed, however,in order to investigate the behavioral consequences ofpublic accountants’ relatively lower degree of independencecommitment.It is especially worth noting that the data indicatesthat independence commitment in the Big Fourfirms is significantly lower than that in the mediumand small size practices (H1b), while the medium sizefirms have the highest independence commitmentresponses among the three firm categories. Besidescommercialization, are there other unique characteristicsof the Big Four firms that may be responsiblefor the difference? Do accountants in different firmcategories have different levels of contacts with peersand with the profession’s core bodies of knowledge?Are they socialized in different ways?The findings regarding the positive, statisticallysignificant relationship between client and independencecommitment are particularly intriguing(H1e) because auditing literature generally assumesthat the relationship between the two is negative.That is, we found that public accountants with ahigher client commitment are more likely toconsider auditor independence as a prime feature ofpublic accounting which needs to be tightly regulated.A potential reason that might explain thisresult relates to the role of public accountants’reflectivity in constructing independence commitment.Influencing authors in the fields of sociologyand organizational analysis emphasize reflectivity as akey feature of modern life, that is to say the individual’sability to reflect and act upon informationabout different aspects of their personal or professionallife (e.g. Crozier and Friedberg, 1980;Giddens, 1990). In this context, public accountantswith a higher client commitment may be morereflectively sensitive about the potential negativeconsequences ensuing from their client commitmentproclivity on auditor independence (consequenceswhich are often described in practitioner literature ashaving the potential to imperil the long-term legit
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
