Abstract

     This study analyzes the auditor personality impact on audit quality, using partial least squares structural equation model and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis methods. This research draws on the insights of Big 5 personality theory and empirical studies in audit quality. The PLS-SEM result reveals that the traits of agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness are positively associated with professional skepticism of auditors, while conscientiousness and neuroticism negatively affect reduced audit quality practices. The fsQCA results show the existence of multiple configurations of personality traits leading to high (low) audit quality. Moreover, the causal asymmetry found reveals that personality is a combination of individual traits that interact in a differentiated and complex way with audit quality. This study complements previous research on auditor’s drivers for supplying audit quality and provides support to audit firm decisions informing about the most relevant combinations of personality traits that auditors must have to make outstanding audit quality.

Introduction

     The provision of credible accounting information is very relevant to improve resource allocation and efficient contracts and it can be achieved through auditing (DeFond and Zhang, 2014). The confidential nature of auditing, which is in force in many countries, prevents users of financial statements from accessing the quality of the work carried out by auditors (Gundry and Liyanarachchi, 2007). However, it is not possible to anticipate the situations in which auditors could compromise audit quality (Gundry and Liyanarachchi, 2007).

     Christina and Brahmana (2019) state that, even though some studies link the individual differences in auditors to audit quality, the results are still not consistent. Some studies focused on the effect of several individual auditors’ personal characteristics, but did not focus on auditor personality (Gul, Wu and Yang, 2013). The studies that focused on the effect of auditor personality on audit quality found a significant relationship between them (Gundry and Liyanarachchi, 2007; Christina and Brahmana, 2019; Balasingam, Arumugam and Sanatova, 2019).

Conclusions, contributions, limitations and future research

     Overall, the results of our study show that there is a relationship between personality and audit quality. The PLS-SEM result reveals that agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness are positively associated with professional skepticism of auditors, while conscientiousness and neuroticism negatively affect RAQP. Additionally, configurational analysis has shown that there are different combinations (asymmetric) of personality traits that lead to the same outcomes in audit quality.

      The findings provide important theoretical, practical and policy implications. First, our work shows that personality traits are a driver of audit quality. Audit quality is influenced by contextual factors (Kleinman, Lin and Palmon, 2014), as personality may be influenced by national culture (Church, 2016). Our finding agrees with the conclusions of studies conducted in other countries (e.g., Farag and Elias, 2016), showing that the relationship seems to be indifferent to the country context. Second, we used the ‘Big Five’ taxonomy to structure the dimensions of the auditor personality, a model that has been used more since the 90 s (John et al., 2008), being the grand theory that explains the functioning of the whole individual (McCrae and Costa, 2008a). However, auditing research has used other taxonomies, such as the typeA and type-B personality model. Third, fsQCA method allows exploring the complexity of the characteristics associated with the auditor’s personality, accepting that there is more than one solution to achieve a desired outcome. Moreover, the causal asymmetry finding reveals that the linear causal methods provide limited understanding of the complexity of drivers of audit quality. Personality is a combination of individual traits that interact in a differentiated and complex way with audit quality. To the best of our knowledge, this is a pioneering study in the use of quantitative and qualitative methods in the relationship analysis between personality traits and audit quality. Moreover, the combination of two different statistical methods lends greater robustness and depth to our research. Fourth, the presence of equifinality in the personality and audit quality relationship shows the absence of an optimal audit professional prototype. Individuals are a heterogeneous strategic asset in audit firms (Samagaio and Rodrigues, 2016), being their main production factor. Consequently, the coexistence of persons with different personalities in an audit firm should call for redoubled care in defining policies for hiring and promoting its professionals and in assigning them to the various engagements, particularly those individuals (partners, managers, and seniors) who make the decisions that most influence the quality of the audit report (e.g., sufficiency and adequacy of audit evidence). A decrease in audit quality negatively impacts the prestige and performance of audit firms (Climent-Serrano, Bustos-Contell, Labatut-Serer and Rey-Martí, ۲۰۱۸). Finally, the relationship found between personality and audit quality has implications for policymakers. The Framework for Audit Quality (IAASB, 2014) recognizes that auditors’ characteristics are one of the determinants of audit quality. Our finding suggests that regulators should consider personality in the entry process to the profession and indicators of quality assessment, broadening the range of human capital attributes normally considered (education, knowledge, and experience).