Corporate Governance, Reputation Concerns, and Herd Behavior
AbstractThis paper offers an explanation for audit committee failures within a corporate governance context. We consider a setting in which the management of a firm sets up financial statements that are possibly biased. These statements are reviewed/audited by an external auditor and by an audit committee. Both agents report the result of their audit, the auditor acting first. The auditor and the audit committee use an imperfect auditing technology. As a result of their work they privately observe a signal regarding the quality of the financial statements. The probability for a correct signal in the sense that an unbiased report is labelled correct and a biased one incorrect, depends on the type of the agent. Good as well as bad agents exist in the economy. Importantly, two good agents observe identical informative signals while the signal observed by a bad agent is uninformative and uncorrelated to those of other good or bad agents. The audit committee as well as the auditor are anxious to build up reputation regarding their ability in the labor market. Given this predominate goal they report on the signal in order to maximize the market’s assessment of their ability. At the end of the game the true character of the financial statements is publicly learned and the market uses this information along with the agents’ reports to update beliefs about the agents’ type. We show that herding equilibria exist in which the auditor reports based on his signal but the audit committee .herds. and follows the auditor’s judgement no matter what its own insights suggest.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management in its series FEMM Working Papers with number 07006.
Length: 23 pages
Date of creation: Feb 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Universitätsplatz 2, Gebäude W und I, 39106 Magdeburg
Phone: (0391) 67-18 584
Fax: (0391) 67-12 120
Web page: http://www.ww.uni-magdeburg.de
More information through EDIRC
corporate governance; audit committee; game theory; herding;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ACC-2007-05-12 (Accounting & Auditing)
- NEP-ALL-2007-05-12 (All new papers)
- NEP-BEC-2007-05-12 (Business Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Revsine, Lawrence, 2002. "Enron: sad but inevitable," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 137-145.
- Arya, Anil & Mittendorf, Brian, 2005. "Using disclosure to influence herd behavior and alter competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 231-246, December.
- Hermalin, Benjamin E & Weisbach, Michael S, 1998.
"Endogenously Chosen Boards of Directors and Their Monitoring of the CEO,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 96-118, March.
- Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 1996. "Endogenously Chosen Boards of Directors and Their Monitoring of the CEO," Microeconomics 9602001, EconWPA, revised 09 Oct 1996.
- Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 1996. "Endogenously Chosen Boards of Directors and Their Monitoring of the CEO," Working Papers _004, University of California at Berkeley, Haas School of Business.
- Mark L. Defond & Rebecca N. Hann & Xuesong Hu, 2005. "Does the Market Value Financial Expertise on Audit Committees of Boards of Directors?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, 05.
- Welch, Ivo, 2000. "Herding among security analysts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 369-396, December.
- Lucian Arye Bebchuk & Jesse M. Fried, 2003.
"Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem,"
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
American Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 71-92, Summer.
- Lucian Arye Bebchuk & Jesse M. Fried, 2003. "Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem," NBER Working Papers 9813, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bebchuk, Lucian Arye & Fried, Jesse, 2003. "Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem," CEPR Discussion Papers 3961, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Scharfstein, David. & Stein, Jeremy C., 1988.
"Herd behavior and investment,"
WP 2062-88., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
- Ozerturk, Saltuk, 2005. "Board independence and CEO pay," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 260-265, August.
- Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Fried, Jesse M., 2003. "Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt81q3136r, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
- Benston, George J. & Hartgraves, Al L., 2002. "Enron: what happened and what we can learn from it," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 105-127.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guido Henkel).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.