This paper examines how performance-based compensation for managers influences
their reporting behavior and the resulting stance auditors take when
deciding whether to certify a manager’s report. The paper makes endogenous
the stance auditors take: with a more conservative stance, auditors are less
likely to certify an inflated report, but are more likely to refuse to certify an
accurate one. The auditor’s tradeoff between these two error types, and the
resulting interplay with the level of performance-based pay for managers, play
a critical role in determining the level of managerial misreporting, investor welfare,
and a number of other key variables. The paper finds that (1) strengthening
the link between pay and reported performance can result in a weaker link between
pay and actual performance and, consequently, lower managerial effort;
(2) conservatism among auditors improves performance measurement; and (3)
raising penalties on managers for overstating earnings can reduce audit quality
and harm investors, while raising penalties on auditors for certifying overstated
results does not harm investors.
|