Search results

The purpose of this review is to evaluate existing learning agility measures and offer recommendations for their use in organizational and scholarly contexts.

This is a general review paper assessing the psychometric qualities of prevalent learning agility measures. Measures were selected based on their predominance and use in the learning agility literature and organizational settings.

Learning agility measurement is an area requiring further research. Multiple conceptualizations of learning agility exist, making the true structure of learning agility unclear. The learning agility measures in the academic literature deviate from learning agility’s traditional conceptualization and require further validation and convergent validity studies. Commercial measures of learning agility exist, but their development procedures are not subjected to peer review and are not widely used in academic research, given the cost associated with their use.

Learning agility is prevalently used in organizational settings and is receiving increased scholarly attention. Various conceptualizations and measurement tools exist, and it is unclear how these theories and measures relate and differ. This paper contributes to practice by providing practical guidelines and limitations for measuring learning agility.

Learning agility was initially conceived as a multidimensional construct comprising people agility, results agility, change agility and mental agility. As the construct has evolved, the dimension structure of the measure has evolved as well. This study addresses a gap in our current understanding of how to conceptualize and measure learning agility.

The authors examine the association between two important audit partner characteristics and the readability of key audit matters (KAMs) disclosed in the audit reports. Specifically, the authors examine how the readability of KAMs is associated with audit partner tenure and workload.

The authors conduct the study in the audit context of Norway and applied the Flesch reading ease scale to measure the readability levels of reported KAMs in the audit reports of companies listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Panel data estimation techniques are applied in estimating how partner tenure and workload are associated with the readability of KAMs. In addition, several robustness tests including different measures of KAMs readability and subsample analyses are performed.

The authors find that audit partner tenure and workload have significant associations with the level of KAMs readability. Specifically, the results show that the reported KAMs become more readable as the audit partner tenure increases but are less readable for partners with more workload. These results appear stronger in subsamples of KAMs typically noted to be more complex and associated with higher risks.

As KAMs represent the most significant issues in financial statements audit, these results provide important insights to stakeholders on the potential impact of audit partner tenure and workload on KAMs readability. Less readable KAMs could derail stakeholders' desire to bridge the information gap between auditors and users of the audit report. The uniqueness of this study lies in its focus on audit partner characteristics as opposed to the audit firm.

Excessive audit partner workload impairs KAMs readability.

As KAMs represent the most significant issues in financial statements audit, these results provide important insights to stakeholders on the potential impact of audit partner tenure and workload on KAMs readability. Less readable KAMs could derail stakeholders' desire to bridge the information gap between auditors and users of the audit report. The uniqueness of this study lies in its focus on audit partner characteristics as opposed to the audit firm.