SYNOPSIS In recent years, work-life balance surpassed compensation as the most important job satisfaction factor among AICPA members (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants [AICPA] 2004). Despite the continued importance of this issue in the accounting profession (AICPA 2011), prior research has not examined work-life balance perceptions across different segments of the profession. We survey 1,063 practicing CPAs in order to assess the comparative work-life balance perceptions across (1) Big 4 versus smaller public accounting firms, (2) audit versus tax functions, and (3) public accounting versus industry work contexts. Consistent with predictions based on institutional logics theory, we find that work-family conflict and job burnout perceptions (our proxies for work-life balance) are highest in the Big 4. We are the first study to measure both support-for and viability-of traditional alternative work arrangements (AWAs), and we report an important distinction between these two constructs. Specifically, while CPAs across all public accounting firms (i.e., Big 4, national, regional, and local firms) report similar levels of organizational support-for AWAs, Big 4 professionals report significantly lower perceived viability-of AWAs (i.e., the ability to use AWAs and remain effective at one's job) compared to accounting professionals at smaller public accounting firms. Further, we find no differences between audit and tax professionals' perceptions across any of our work-life balance measures. We also document nuanced differences regarding work-life balance perceptions in public accounting versus industry. For example, contrary to conventional wisdom, work-life balance is not uniformly “better” in industry (e.g., burnout is actually lower in smaller public accounting firms compared to industry). Finally, we use open-ended responses from a follow-up survey to provide several recommendations for firms to improve their work-life balance efforts.
SUMMARY: This paper tests a model of perceived gender discrimination in the audit profession. Using a sample of 234 female auditors employed in public accounting firms, we examine the effects of workgroup composition factors and organizational climate factors on perceived gender discrimination, along with the impact of perceived gender discrimination on several critical organizational outcomes. We find that female auditors report lower levels of gender discrimination when employed (1) in firms with more female partners, (2) in firms with stronger ethical climates, (3) in firms that are more supportive of alternative work arrangements, and (4) in firms that provide higher levels of top management support for the personal well-being of their employees. Further, we find that perceived gender discrimination is associated with lower organizational citizenship behavior and higher turnover intentions. Implications for research and public policy are discussed.
This study examines internal control weaknesses (ICWs) reported under Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Section 302 in the context of mergers and acquisitions. We predict that problems in an acquirer's internal control environment have adverse operational implications for acquisition performance. We argue that acquirers with low-quality internal information needed to select profitable acquisitions will make poorer acquisition decisions. We also argue that ICWs impede effective monitoring and are likely to hinder integration tasks that are important to acquisition profitability. We find that ICWs disclosed prior to an acquisition announcement predict significantly lower post-acquisition operating performance and abnormal stock returns. Poorer post-acquisition performance is concentrated in ICWs that are expected to impede acquisition activities (i.e., forecasting/valuation, monitoring, and integration). Our findings contribute to the literature linking ineffective internal control over financial reporting to negative operational outcomes. We also contribute to the SOX cost-benefit debate by documenting a previously unidentified benefit of ICW disclosures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.