The relative effectiveness of persuasion tactics in auditor–client negotiations |
| |
| Authors: | Stephen Perreault Thomas Kida |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Accounting, Bryant University, Smithfield, RI 02917, United States;2. Department of Accounting and Information Systems, Isenberg School of Management, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, United States;1. Virginia Commonwealth University, 301 W. Main Street, Box 844000, Richmond, VA 23284-4000, United States;2. Bentley University, 175 Forest Street, Waltham, MA 02452-4705, United States;1. Babson College, United States;2. University of Massachusetts Amherst, Isenberg School of Management, United States;1. Accounting & Information Systems, Wisconsin School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA;2. Department of Accounting, Goizueta Business School, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA;3. Department of Accounting, Neeley School of Business, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX, 76129, USA;1. Von Allmen School of Accountancy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 40506, USA;2. Department of Management and Marketing, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, 59812, USA;3. McIntire School of Commerce, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 22904, USA;4. Department of Management, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 40506, USA;1. Gatton College of Business & Economics, University of Kentucky, 423W B&E, Lexington, KY, 40506, USA;2. Wisconsin School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 434C Grainger, Madison, WI, 53706, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | In this study, we examine the effectiveness of four persuasive arguments that auditors may use to convince clients to accept their desired position in auditor–client negotiations. In addition, we investigate how the style in which the argument is communicated by the auditor impacts its effectiveness. Our results indicate that the type of persuasion tactic used by auditors significantly impacts the amount of concessions made by clients. Specifically, we find that, while threatening to qualify the audit opinion can result in significant client concessions, a tactic of simply informing the client that other companies have handled the accounting issue in a way consistent with the auditor’s preference is as effective, or more effective, than all of the other tactics examined at eliciting significant concessions as well as engendering positive affect toward the auditor. This result is consistent with findings from the persuasion literature relating to the pervasive power of social validation. We also find that clients offer more concessions, evaluate the auditor more positively, and are more satisfied with the negotiation outcome when auditors communicate their arguments using a cooperative, as opposed to a contentious, communication style. The results of this study indicate that auditors may benefit from training in persuasion tactics in order to achieve more desirable negotiation outcomes. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
