美国注册投资公司和上市公司审计委员会治理实践分析的启示

J. Jenkins, Jonathan S. Pyzoha, Mark H. Taylor
{"title":"美国注册投资公司和上市公司审计委员会治理实践分析的启示","authors":"J. Jenkins, Jonathan S. Pyzoha, Mark H. Taylor","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3486312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Guided by agency theory and institutional theory, we investigate the influence of the unique aspects of investment companies (ICs) on audit committee (AC) governance and compare AC IC and operating company (OC) governance practices. We use a dual-method, three-stage research approach: (1) surveys of 107 IC AC members, (2) interviews of ten AC and ten management members at ICs, and (3) interviews of ten OC AC members and follow-up interviews of the ten IC AC members. Consistent with agency theory, we find IC ACs are substantively engaged in overseeing AC operations quality (AC composition and diligence) and other critical governance areas (auditor hiring/retention, audit process, agenda setting, and critical risks), whereas management is not. In contrast, our findings for OC ACs reveal evidence of both ceremonial oversight (auditor retention/hiring and agenda setting) and substantive oversight (audit process and critical risks). Our study’s findings have important implications for regulators and practitioners.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insights from an Analysis of Audit Committee Governance Practices at U.S. Registered Investment Companies and Public Operating Companies\",\"authors\":\"J. Jenkins, Jonathan S. Pyzoha, Mark H. Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3486312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Guided by agency theory and institutional theory, we investigate the influence of the unique aspects of investment companies (ICs) on audit committee (AC) governance and compare AC IC and operating company (OC) governance practices. We use a dual-method, three-stage research approach: (1) surveys of 107 IC AC members, (2) interviews of ten AC and ten management members at ICs, and (3) interviews of ten OC AC members and follow-up interviews of the ten IC AC members. Consistent with agency theory, we find IC ACs are substantively engaged in overseeing AC operations quality (AC composition and diligence) and other critical governance areas (auditor hiring/retention, audit process, agenda setting, and critical risks), whereas management is not. In contrast, our findings for OC ACs reveal evidence of both ceremonial oversight (auditor retention/hiring and agenda setting) and substantive oversight (audit process and critical risks). Our study’s findings have important implications for regulators and practitioners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3486312\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3486312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在代理理论和制度理论的指导下,我们研究了投资公司(IC)独特的方面对审计委员会(AC)治理的影响,并比较了AC IC和运营公司(OC)的治理实践。我们采用了双方法、三阶段的研究方法:(1)对107名IC AC成员进行调查,(2)对10名IC AC成员和10名IC管理成员进行访谈,以及(3)对10名OC AC成员进行访谈和对10名IC AC成员进行随访访谈。与代理理论一致,我们发现审计机构实质性地参与监督审计机构的运营质量(审计机构的组成和尽职调查)和其他关键治理领域(审计师招聘/保留、审计流程、议程设置和关键风险),而管理层则没有。相比之下,我们对审计委员会的调查结果揭示了礼仪监督(审计师保留/雇用和议程设置)和实质性监督(审计过程和关键风险)的证据。我们的研究结果对监管机构和从业人员具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Insights from an Analysis of Audit Committee Governance Practices at U.S. Registered Investment Companies and Public Operating Companies
Guided by agency theory and institutional theory, we investigate the influence of the unique aspects of investment companies (ICs) on audit committee (AC) governance and compare AC IC and operating company (OC) governance practices. We use a dual-method, three-stage research approach: (1) surveys of 107 IC AC members, (2) interviews of ten AC and ten management members at ICs, and (3) interviews of ten OC AC members and follow-up interviews of the ten IC AC members. Consistent with agency theory, we find IC ACs are substantively engaged in overseeing AC operations quality (AC composition and diligence) and other critical governance areas (auditor hiring/retention, audit process, agenda setting, and critical risks), whereas management is not. In contrast, our findings for OC ACs reveal evidence of both ceremonial oversight (auditor retention/hiring and agenda setting) and substantive oversight (audit process and critical risks). Our study’s findings have important implications for regulators and practitioners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Don’t shoot yourself in the foot! A (real-effort task) experiment on income redistribution and voting. Causal Attribution, Benefits Sharing, and Earnings Management Sleep Debt and Information Processing in Financial Markets Game Changer: Can Modifications to Audit Firm Communication Improve Auditors’ Actions in Response to Heightened Fraud Risk? Retail Bond Investors and Credit Ratings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1