Eric Horne, Serena Loftus, Sarah Shonka McCoy, Amanda M. Winn
SUMMARY A consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic is that workers increasingly want work that aligns with their values. Given that Gen Z, the next generation of accountants, is characterized by a focus on ESG issues, we use an experiment to test whether emphasizing sustainability assurance roles attracts individuals to the profession and which types of individuals are most attracted. We find individuals are more interested in becoming accountants when sustainability assurance positions are emphasized, relative to financial positions. We further find individuals with a prosocial (but not proself) social value orientation drive this result due to the greater intrinsic appeal of sustainability jobs to these individuals. We also find some evidence that prosocial individuals exhibit lower professional skepticism than proself individuals, highlighting a potential negative consequence of attracting prosocial individuals to the profession. Our findings illuminate how the accounting profession can attract prosocial individuals and one implication of doing so.
{"title":"Attracting the Next Generation of Accountants: The Joint Impact of Sustainability Emphasis and Social Value Orientation on Accounting Career Perceptions","authors":"Eric Horne, Serena Loftus, Sarah Shonka McCoy, Amanda M. Winn","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2022-107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-107","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY A consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic is that workers increasingly want work that aligns with their values. Given that Gen Z, the next generation of accountants, is characterized by a focus on ESG issues, we use an experiment to test whether emphasizing sustainability assurance roles attracts individuals to the profession and which types of individuals are most attracted. We find individuals are more interested in becoming accountants when sustainability assurance positions are emphasized, relative to financial positions. We further find individuals with a prosocial (but not proself) social value orientation drive this result due to the greater intrinsic appeal of sustainability jobs to these individuals. We also find some evidence that prosocial individuals exhibit lower professional skepticism than proself individuals, highlighting a potential negative consequence of attracting prosocial individuals to the profession. Our findings illuminate how the accounting profession can attract prosocial individuals and one implication of doing so.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"2 1-2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135371065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study examines whether the key audit matters (KAMs) disclosed in expanded audit reports as a part of recent regulatory reforms are informative for investors in an emerging economy setting. Using the recent adoption of expanded audit reports for firms listed exclusively in Mainland China, we find robust evidence that the abnormal trading volume and earnings response coefficients are higher and that stock price synchronicity is lower during the postadoption than preadoption period. In additional tests, we find evidence that KAMs are more informative for non-state-owned enterprises, smaller firms, and firms with a smaller analyst following. Finally, we find that investors respond to the characteristics of KAM disclosures, providing corroborative evidence of the informativeness of these disclosures. Overall, our study provides systematic evidence that KAMs are incrementally informative for investors in an emerging economy. Data Availability: The data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M41; M42; M48.
{"title":"Informativeness of Key Audit Matters: Evidence from China","authors":"Beng Wee Goh, Jimmy Lee, Dan Li, Muzhi Wang","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2020-099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2020-099","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines whether the key audit matters (KAMs) disclosed in expanded audit reports as a part of recent regulatory reforms are informative for investors in an emerging economy setting. Using the recent adoption of expanded audit reports for firms listed exclusively in Mainland China, we find robust evidence that the abnormal trading volume and earnings response coefficients are higher and that stock price synchronicity is lower during the postadoption than preadoption period. In additional tests, we find evidence that KAMs are more informative for non-state-owned enterprises, smaller firms, and firms with a smaller analyst following. Finally, we find that investors respond to the characteristics of KAM disclosures, providing corroborative evidence of the informativeness of these disclosures. Overall, our study provides systematic evidence that KAMs are incrementally informative for investors in an emerging economy. Data Availability: The data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M41; M42; M48.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135714486","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
SUMMARY We examine the value of auditor verification to small businesses when they face economic uncertainty. The COVID-19 pandemic was a significant, exogenous economic shock that immediately heightened the need for external funding for many companies. Using a sample of small, private companies from 21 countries, we examine how the receipt of an audit prior to the pandemic affects the primary type of financing companies obtain during the pandemic. We find that companies with audited financial statements available are more inclined to secure primary funding from bank loans rather than from equity contributions from existing owners or new investors. However, an audit is not associated with primary funding from government sources. We also document that businesses benefit most from an audit when information asymmetry and economic disruption are relatively high and when the supply of government liquidity support is relatively low. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M21; M42.
{"title":"The Value of Auditor Verification Amid Economic Uncertainty: International Evidence from Small Businesses","authors":"Xi Ai, Chenxi Lin, Nathan J. Newton","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2022-104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-104","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY We examine the value of auditor verification to small businesses when they face economic uncertainty. The COVID-19 pandemic was a significant, exogenous economic shock that immediately heightened the need for external funding for many companies. Using a sample of small, private companies from 21 countries, we examine how the receipt of an audit prior to the pandemic affects the primary type of financing companies obtain during the pandemic. We find that companies with audited financial statements available are more inclined to secure primary funding from bank loans rather than from equity contributions from existing owners or new investors. However, an audit is not associated with primary funding from government sources. We also document that businesses benefit most from an audit when information asymmetry and economic disruption are relatively high and when the supply of government liquidity support is relatively low. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M21; M42.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"20 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135714490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tim D. Bauer, J. Efrim Boritz, Krista Fiolleau, Bradley Pomeroy, Adam Vitalis, Pei Wang
SUMMARY We identify 33 areas where assurance services other than financial statement audits are currently offered or are emerging and conduct an extensive web search to document the contextual features of the services in each area. Using a framework for the expansion of assurance services, we analyze these features by asking: (1) Does the subject matter relate to financial information or controls? (2) Are criteria available to evaluate the subject matter? The answers allow us to categorize each area based on whether it represents an expansion opportunity to a traditional, but hypothetical, CPA firm. We then compare our expectations against observed areas where real-world firms have a presence. Finally, we report on two roundtables with senior assurance leaders to validate our findings and enhance our understanding of what is needed for each area to become, or continue to be, well-positioned for expansion by CPA firms.
{"title":"Cataloging the Marketplace of Assurance Services","authors":"Tim D. Bauer, J. Efrim Boritz, Krista Fiolleau, Bradley Pomeroy, Adam Vitalis, Pei Wang","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2022-196","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-196","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY We identify 33 areas where assurance services other than financial statement audits are currently offered or are emerging and conduct an extensive web search to document the contextual features of the services in each area. Using a framework for the expansion of assurance services, we analyze these features by asking: (1) Does the subject matter relate to financial information or controls? (2) Are criteria available to evaluate the subject matter? The answers allow us to categorize each area based on whether it represents an expansion opportunity to a traditional, but hypothetical, CPA firm. We then compare our expectations against observed areas where real-world firms have a presence. Finally, we report on two roundtables with senior assurance leaders to validate our findings and enhance our understanding of what is needed for each area to become, or continue to be, well-positioned for expansion by CPA firms.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"22 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135714483","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-27DOI: 10.2308/0278-0380-42.4.i
{"title":"Covers and Front Matter","authors":"","doi":"10.2308/0278-0380-42.4.i","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/0278-0380-42.4.i","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"221 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136317458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
SUMMARY We interviewed 30 assurance professionals in the United States regarding how and to what extent non-Big 4 firms incorporated technologies into assurance engagements during the COVID-19 pandemic. Informed by technology acceptance models, our findings show that the pandemic played an accelerator role, prompting an open attitude toward experimenting with technologies in assurance engagements. This experimentation increased perceptions of the usefulness of technology in engagement efficiency, given easier and faster evidence gathering. However, the readiness and security of clients’ systems remain barriers in evidence gathering. Assurance professionals perceive technology as useful in producing better quality evidence evaluation, with usage stymied by challenges related to source data integrity, naive use of tools, and distrust of outputs limiting the extent of change in evidence evaluation. Our study indicates more modest technology gains in evidence evaluation than in evidence gathering during the pandemic due to barriers with higher stakes, often tied to assurance conclusions.
{"title":"Technology and Evidence in Non-Big 4 Assurance Engagements: Insights from the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"Elizabeth C. Altiero, Lisa Baudot, Mouna Hazgui","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2022-068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-068","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY We interviewed 30 assurance professionals in the United States regarding how and to what extent non-Big 4 firms incorporated technologies into assurance engagements during the COVID-19 pandemic. Informed by technology acceptance models, our findings show that the pandemic played an accelerator role, prompting an open attitude toward experimenting with technologies in assurance engagements. This experimentation increased perceptions of the usefulness of technology in engagement efficiency, given easier and faster evidence gathering. However, the readiness and security of clients’ systems remain barriers in evidence gathering. Assurance professionals perceive technology as useful in producing better quality evidence evaluation, with usage stymied by challenges related to source data integrity, naive use of tools, and distrust of outputs limiting the extent of change in evidence evaluation. Our study indicates more modest technology gains in evidence evaluation than in evidence gathering during the pandemic due to barriers with higher stakes, often tied to assurance conclusions.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135663730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
SUMMARY Regulators, investors, and boards of directors are increasingly demanding information about organizations’ cybersecurity risk management. I examine the effect of the AICPA’s voluntary cybersecurity examination service on investor perceptions and decisions. Similar to a previous AICPA IT-related assurance service called WebTrust that failed in the marketplace, cybersecurity examinations face competition from less comprehensive and less costly assurance services in a nonstandardized assurance market, and it is unclear whether investors will recognize the value provided by the more comprehensive assurance service. I find that investors are more willing to invest when management disclosures describe a cybersecurity examination compared with a less comprehensive assurance service but only if the assurance is in response to a cybersecurity incident. I also find that this effect is mediated by investor perceptions of assurance quality. I, however, do not find support for these same effects when the assurance is disclosed in the absence of an incident.
{"title":"The Impact of the Type of Cybersecurity Assurance Service and Cybersecurity Incidents on Investor Perceptions and Decisions","authors":"Rebecca R. Perols","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-19-022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-19-022","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY Regulators, investors, and boards of directors are increasingly demanding information about organizations’ cybersecurity risk management. I examine the effect of the AICPA’s voluntary cybersecurity examination service on investor perceptions and decisions. Similar to a previous AICPA IT-related assurance service called WebTrust that failed in the marketplace, cybersecurity examinations face competition from less comprehensive and less costly assurance services in a nonstandardized assurance market, and it is unclear whether investors will recognize the value provided by the more comprehensive assurance service. I find that investors are more willing to invest when management disclosures describe a cybersecurity examination compared with a less comprehensive assurance service but only if the assurance is in response to a cybersecurity incident. I also find that this effect is mediated by investor perceptions of assurance quality. I, however, do not find support for these same effects when the assurance is disclosed in the absence of an incident.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135963034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Li Fang, Jeffrey Pittman, Yinqi Zhang, Yuping Zhao
SUMMARY Prior research provides some evidence that strict corporate monitoring constrains financial misreporting. We examine whether the efficacy of various corporate monitoring mechanisms hinges on the nature of accounting standards—rules-based standards (RBS) versus principles-based standards (PBS)—in place. We generally document that the negative association between the likelihood of misstatements and tough monitoring by audit committees, boards, external auditors, and the SEC is more pronounced under RBS than under PBS. This evidence collectively suggests that most corporate gatekeepers fulfill their monitoring obligations primarily through ensuring better compliance with detailed standards when the applicable standards are more specific and leave less room for discretion. Although some prior studies document higher financial reporting quality under PBS, our results imply that it is important for regulators to also consider the potentially higher monitoring efficacy under RBS when setting accounting standards. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M40; M42.
{"title":"Corporate Monitoring and Misreporting: The Role of Rules-Based and Principles-Based Accounting Standards","authors":"Li Fang, Jeffrey Pittman, Yinqi Zhang, Yuping Zhao","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2022-185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-185","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY Prior research provides some evidence that strict corporate monitoring constrains financial misreporting. We examine whether the efficacy of various corporate monitoring mechanisms hinges on the nature of accounting standards—rules-based standards (RBS) versus principles-based standards (PBS)—in place. We generally document that the negative association between the likelihood of misstatements and tough monitoring by audit committees, boards, external auditors, and the SEC is more pronounced under RBS than under PBS. This evidence collectively suggests that most corporate gatekeepers fulfill their monitoring obligations primarily through ensuring better compliance with detailed standards when the applicable standards are more specific and leave less room for discretion. Although some prior studies document higher financial reporting quality under PBS, our results imply that it is important for regulators to also consider the potentially higher monitoring efficacy under RBS when setting accounting standards. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M40; M42.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136152395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lin Cheng, Jacob Jaggi, Paul N. Michas, Jeffrey Schatzberg
SUMMARY We examine auditor communication provisions (ACPs) in private loan agreements, which are private contracting mechanisms establishing communication between lenders and their borrowers’ auditors. We provide evidence that lenders value auditor communications and often specify different types of ACPs that facilitate lender monitoring. With predictable variation across the different ACP types, ACPs are associated with larger loans, longer maturities, larger loan syndicates, more financial covenants, and greater slack in financial covenants. In examining audit effort implications for borrowers, we find that ACPs are associated with higher audit fees and longer audit report lags. This is consistent with auditors responding to the litigation risk ACPs impose. In samples where the risk of third-party litigation is greater, the association between ACPs and audit effort proxies is heightened, suggesting the increased litigation risk brought about by ACPs interacts with other audit client-specific risk factors. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M42; D82; G21; G30; K40.
{"title":"Auditor Communication Provisions in Private Loan Agreements: Do They Matter?","authors":"Lin Cheng, Jacob Jaggi, Paul N. Michas, Jeffrey Schatzberg","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2021-059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2021-059","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY We examine auditor communication provisions (ACPs) in private loan agreements, which are private contracting mechanisms establishing communication between lenders and their borrowers’ auditors. We provide evidence that lenders value auditor communications and often specify different types of ACPs that facilitate lender monitoring. With predictable variation across the different ACP types, ACPs are associated with larger loans, longer maturities, larger loan syndicates, more financial covenants, and greater slack in financial covenants. In examining audit effort implications for borrowers, we find that ACPs are associated with higher audit fees and longer audit report lags. This is consistent with auditors responding to the litigation risk ACPs impose. In samples where the risk of third-party litigation is greater, the association between ACPs and audit effort proxies is heightened, suggesting the increased litigation risk brought about by ACPs interacts with other audit client-specific risk factors. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M42; D82; G21; G30; K40.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136153531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
SUMMARY We investigate whether the new critical audit matters (CAMs) disclosure requirement for auditors under the PCAOB Standard AS 3101 affects audited firms’ financial reporting decisions in the context of goodwill impairment recognition. We argue that an auditor's intense engagement with management and the audit committee in the CAMs determination and evaluation process improves management's information sets. Specifically, we report that the propensity to recognize goodwill impairment loss increases for firms with goodwill-related CAM disclosure relative to those without. This result is more pronounced when the likelihood of expected impairment is higher, suggesting that CAMs reporting lowers managers’ discretion in delaying impairment loss recognition. Additionally, we find that goodwill-related CAM disclosure increases the length and use of uncertain words in goodwill-related footnote disclosure by management but has no significant impact on audit costs. Overall, these findings suggest that adopting CAMs requirements can reduce management's discretion in financial reporting decisions. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M41; M42.
{"title":"Does Goodwill-Related Critical Audit Matters Disclosure Influence Firms’ Financial Reporting Decisions? Evidence from Goodwill Impairment","authors":"Nusrat Jahan, M. Sydul Karim","doi":"10.2308/ajpt-2022-129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-2022-129","url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY We investigate whether the new critical audit matters (CAMs) disclosure requirement for auditors under the PCAOB Standard AS 3101 affects audited firms’ financial reporting decisions in the context of goodwill impairment recognition. We argue that an auditor's intense engagement with management and the audit committee in the CAMs determination and evaluation process improves management's information sets. Specifically, we report that the propensity to recognize goodwill impairment loss increases for firms with goodwill-related CAM disclosure relative to those without. This result is more pronounced when the likelihood of expected impairment is higher, suggesting that CAMs reporting lowers managers’ discretion in delaying impairment loss recognition. Additionally, we find that goodwill-related CAM disclosure increases the length and use of uncertain words in goodwill-related footnote disclosure by management but has no significant impact on audit costs. Overall, these findings suggest that adopting CAMs requirements can reduce management's discretion in financial reporting decisions. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: M41; M42.","PeriodicalId":48142,"journal":{"name":"Auditing-A Journal of Practice & Theory","volume":"2018 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135963026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：