Search results

This study aims to investigate how audit committee members’ geographical location relative to corporate headquarters affects audit fees. The motivation for the paper rests on the observation that regulatory and market trends have significantly affected the composition of boards of directors and audit committees. To ensure that audit committees play their monitoring role, regulations now require directors’ independence and some level of financial expertise. The need to find directors who meet these requirements, as well as the advent of globalization and technological improvements lead firms to expand their reach when looking for directors.

The authors use a sample of 1,517 firm-year observations of Canadian firms from 2008 to 2017. The study relies on multivariate analyses.

The results show that, among nonlocal audit committee members, the presence of foreign directors is associated with higher audit fees. In contrast, other nonlocal audit committee members do not have a differential impact on audit fees. This effect is more prevalent in large firms. Moreover, having a foreign chair of the audit committee as well as foreign audit committee members who are not accounting experts appear to accentuate the increase in audit fees. A possible explanation for the finding is that, from the supply side, auditors assign a higher risk to firms with a higher percentage of foreign audit committee members. Alternatively, from the demand side, firms with foreign audit committee members may ask for more audit effort. Further analysis indicates that having a higher percentage of foreign audit committee members is associated with a higher likelihood of restatements, an indication of low audit quality.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to document that auditors price the location of audit committee members and consider it when planning for their audit.

Despite an increasing trend in adoption of social media by for-profit organizations and their chief executive officers (CEOs), there is little understanding of how these new channels of communication are incorporated into the broader communication domain of a firm to discharge accountability during a crisis, when accountability is of critical importance. More importantly, research on how people perceive a crisis and voice their opinions to firms and CEOs on social media in reaction to that crisis is rather limited. Therefore, in this study the authors investigate these questions.

This study is based on a case. The authors focus on the biggest data breach in Internet history in a pioneer technology firm, the Yahoo data breach. The authors conduct descriptive and dramaturgical analyses informed by Goffman to investigate how Yahoo manages its several front stages (communication channels), including social media during and after the Yahoo data breach announcements, and how people respond to the Yahoo's front stage management.

The results show that, during this crisis, Yahoo engages in management of its front stages by first limiting them to a few, then by redrawing the line between its back and front stages, and finally by expanding its front stages to include two-way communication channels, including social media. An ongoing accountability process back stage guides Yahoo's management of its front stages and undermines Yahoo's accountability in front stages. However, social media audiences challenge Yahoo's control of its front stages by using various frames to make sense of the crisis, and to demand accountability.

This study furthers the understanding of how social media platforms are positioned in a firm's broader communication channels during a crisis. It also enhances understanding of accountability demand, especially during critical times in a digitized era.