Giving the Tough Message: Improving Coaching Effectiveness

• In Event: Continental Breakfast and Research & Education Forum
  In Paper Session: Table 20: Auditor Interactions and Use of Specialists

Abstract

Workpaper review is a crucial part of the audit process that is intended to ensure overall audit quality, specifically assisting in developing auditors’ skills and technical knowledge. The review process provides workpaper preparers with performance feedback on specific tasks and instructions in how to improve the quality of the workpapers. However, research in psychology suggests that the manner in which the review is given can significantly impact an individual’s performance. In auditing, there is likely substantial variation in how reviewers conduct a review. Andiola and Bedard (2015) provide detailed evidence on auditors’ experiences with these issues using an experiential questionnaire, but that method is limited by an inability to measure task performance, and to assess causal relationships. This study uses a controlled experiment to investigate whether the combination of the sign of performance feedback (i.e., negative or positive) and the achievement goals emphasized by the reviewer (i.e., learning or performance) affects the workpaper preparer’s performance. I also examine whether the preparer’s propensity to be receptive to feedback and coaching (i.e., feedback orientation) impacts performance. Results indicate that proper alignment of the sign of performance feedback and achievement goals (e.g., negative feedback and learning goals) positively affects preparers’ performance. In addition, it appears this effect varies somewhat depending on the feedback orientation of the preparer. My results suggest that reviewers should consider how they conduct the review, as well as the characteristics of the individual who is receiving the review, to increase coaching effectiveness and elicit better performance.

Author

• Lindsay Andiola, Virginia Commonwealth University