See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313160531

The effect of time budget pressure on auditors' behaviour

Article  in  Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience · February 2017

DOI: 10.1166/asl.2017.7185

CITATIONS READS

8 3,534

4 authors:

Mohd Nazli Mohd Nor Malcolm Smith

Universiti Malaysia Terengganu University of South Australia
21 PUBLICATIONS   250 CITATIONS    269 PUBLICATIONS   4,590 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Zubaidah Ismail Roshaiza Taha

Edith Cowan University Universiti Malaysia Terengganu
43 PUBLICATIONS   646 CITATIONS    38 PUBLICATIONS   403 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Research Collaboration View project

PhD thesis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohd Nazli Mohd Nor on 20 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Copyright © 2017 American Scientific Publishers Advanced Science Letters

All rights reserved Vol. 23 (1) January 2017
Printed in the United States of America

The Effect of Time Budget Pressure on Auditors’

Behaviour
Mohd Nazli Mohd Nor1, Malcolm Smith2, Zubaidah Ismail3, Roshaiza Taha1
1School of Maritime Business and Management, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu 21030, Malaysia
2School of Commerce, University of South Australia, South Australia 5001, Australia
3School of Business, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia 6050, Australia

This paper investigates the occurrence of time budget pressure among auditors in Malaysia. Using the questionnaire, auditors
registered with the Malaysian Institute of Accountant were approached to gather their perceptions about the time budget
pressure in the previous year of audit work and their respond to the pressure. The results indicate that time budget pressure was
difficult to attain regardless position, experience, firm size and gender; and under tight budget, majority of the auditors work
harder and charge time properly or requesting extra budget to complete the audit engagement.
Keywords: Time budget pressure, auditor, reduced audit quality practices.

1. INTRODUCTION audit quality. Auditors may issue erroneous audit opinion

High stress among the accounting profession has been
a concern since the pioneering work on tax accountants in
195815. Now, accounting particularly auditing is
considered as a stressful profession4,16. Many accountants
experienced health (e.g. chronic bad pain and headaches)
and behaviour problems (e.g. heavy smoking and drinking)
as consequences of stress16. Unique characteristic of
auditing profession exposes auditors to a number of
organisation pressure such as time budget pressure. Time
budget pressure occurs mainly due to accounting peak
period when auditors’ workload increases without
increasing in time budget23. Furthermore, time budget
remains the same as off peak period is due to the firms try
to be competitive by not revising their fee20 although the
amount of audit work increases tremendously9,11,39. This
put pressure on auditors to complete audit work within the
allocated time and budget16.
*
Email Address: nazli@umt.edu.my
Time budget pressure is not only give negative
implication to auditors (e.g, health problem) but extended
to the firm and stakeholder, in the form of substandard
1
which could jeopardise the firms. This is evidence from the
previous studies where the time budget pressure could
affect the quality of audit work10,19,37. Wrong opinion given
may lead to legal liability and diminish firm’s reputation14.
Those who rely on financial report may proceed with
litigation action if they suffer significant losses from
auditors’ wrong judgment.
Therefore, as the audit quality is heavily scrutinised by
the public especially after several financial scandals
involving big companies (e.g., Enron, Parmalat,
WorldCom), it is important to investigate time budget
pressure, one of the main factor that affects the audit
quality. The paper aims to investigate the existence of time
budget pressure among the auditors in Malaysia,
specifically at various position, auditing experience, firms’
types and gender. Although time budget pressure has been
studied in Malaysia37, their results were reported in
aggregated form, thus did not give more information to
which audit positions experiencing time budget pressure.
Furthermore, they did not investigate time budget pressure
from auditors’ experience and gender perspectives. In fact,
studying on gender in audit firms remains an “under-
research area” in accounting literature2. Thus, this paper is
Adv. Sci. Lett. 23, 356–360, 2017
to address this gap in the literature by examining the issue
of time budget pressure in auditing environment. Our main
focus is on the level of time budget pressure experienced
by auditors, which is a unique feature of auditing
profession.
The reminder of the paper is organised as follows. The
next section reviews previous studies on time budget
pressure and develops research questions. The third section
describes the research methodology, while the forth section
presents the results. The final section provides a discussion
and conclusion of the results.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
One of the major problem in auditing profession is time
budget pressure11. Hence, to succeed in the profession
auditors should be able to absorb this pressure28. The
reason for time budget pressure to occur is inadequate
working hours allocated to specific audit engagement31.
Limited resources is always cited as a reason for
inadequate time budget allocated to auditors11. In this
situation, it is difficult for auditors to maintain high quality
audit work7. Therefore, budget attainability is an important
factor in determining the degree of pressure experienced
by auditors33. The lesser the budget allocated, the higher
the pressure experienced by auditors. Consequently,
auditors may compromise one of the elements, meeting
time budget or maintaining audit quality as it is hard to
achieve both40.
Numerous studies have investigated time budget
pressure in auditing profession. For instance, 17% and 29%
of senior auditors in Ireland indicated that the time budget
in the previous year was impossible and practically
unattainable, respectively37. On another study in Ireland,
36% of staff and senior auditors indicated that time budget
are either very tight, practically unattainable or impossible
to achieve39. In United States, 45% of the staff auditors
believe time budget is attainable with considerable effort27.
18% of the auditors in the study perceived time budget is
either impossible or practically unattainable. In Australia,
47% of auditors believed that time budgets are “often”
adequate, 51% believed they are “sometimes” adequate
and 2% believed they are “never” adequate10. Whereas,
30% of the auditors in Malaysia perceived time budget was
attainable, 32% felt the budget was difficult to attain and
38% believed the budget unattainable38.
To summarize, time budget pressure occurred in
auditing profession and varies along a continuum that
ranges from low to very high and among the various
positions of auditors either in Big-Four firms or not.
However, most of the previous studies focusing on either
staff or senior auditors. Although there was an attempt to
investigate time budget pressure from various positions38,
RESEARCH ARTICLE
their results did not report for each position but in
aggregated form. Therefore, the current study attempts to
fill the gap that exist in this area by investigating and
reporting time budget pressure for each audit position, year
of auditing experience and firms type, either Big-Four or
non-Big Four firms. The specific question addressed in this
study is as follow:
RQ1: Does time budget pressure affected by audit
position
RQ2: Does time budget pressure affected by firm
types
RQ3: Does time budget pressure affected by year
of auditing experience
It is common that gender bias or gender inequality tends
to exist in the work environment such as from time budget
pressure which may negatively affect the output34. Gender
bias or gender inequality influenced the quality of work
produced as it can caused mentally and physically
disturbance. Studies on gender explains the differences in
working environment through structural approach3,43 and
gender socialization approach1,2,5,17. Structural approach
highlights the equality among men and women under
similar occupation conditions showing that there is no
gender differences in the organization. Thus women should
enjoy the same benefits in term of wages, treatment and
opportunity. Whilst gender socialization approach portray
the diversity among man and women. In this approach men
and women have different interest, decisions and skills.
Thus tendency of gender inequality in work environment
is higher under gender socialization approach as compared
to structural approach.
Despite scarcity amount of studies solely focus on
gender in analysing the company performance, the
unanimous result has been achieved regarding this. The
results support the gender socialization approach1,2,5,17
where women are less likely to be given a higher position
in the organization24 due to inability to working extra
hours13. In addition women also received lower reward as
compared to men. This has causes higher stress level
among women employee. High turnover rate among
females employee especially in their late twenties and early
thirties due to stagnant career development after a number
of years in the firm29.
Accordingly, the specific question addressed in this
study is:
RQ4. Do time budget pressure affected by gender
of the Malaysian auditors?
Audit firms use time budget pressure in an audit
planning as a control mechanism. Therefore, time budget
2
RESEARCH ARTICLE
is necessary to ensure an audit engagement could be
completed within the allocated time frame. Pressure to
work within the budget makes auditors work harder8,37 and
more efficient10,32. Auditors also will make better decision
by focusing to more relevant information18.
However, time budget pressure is a serious threat to the
profession and at some point, auditors may negatively
respond to it11. Auditors have incentives to exhibit
undesirable behaviours under time budget pressure7,10,20
especially when time budget is perceived as a performance
indicator for promotion by auditors12.
The more disturbing consequence of time budget
pressure is it could adversely affect audit quality.
Dysfunctional behaviours among the auditors are more
likely to occur under time budget pressure27,35,37.
Dysfunctional behaviours such as reduced audit quality
practices (RAQP) is used as a way out by auditors when
they are struggling to meet the budget, which consequently
could jeopardise their performance evaluation. Previous
studies seem to support these arguments. The more
difficult to achieve the budget, the higher the RAQP
involved by auditors. This finding is supported by several
other studies. 22% of the auditors engage in RAQP as a
result of tight budget7. A similar finding has been found in
a more recent study. Of the 60% of auditors surveyed who
admitted to engaging in RAQP, almost 80% of them cited
time budget pressures as a factor in committing RAQP10.
In a study of auditors in New Zealand, premature sign-off
was a consequence of time budget pressure 19 and 40% of
the auditors in Malaysia reduced the quality of audit work
as a response to tight budget38. Therefore research question
5 is stated as follow:
RQ5. What is the respond of the Malaysian
auditors on time budget pressure?
At the other extreme, poor auditors’ job performance is
associated with tight time budget. There is an interaction
between time budget pressure and auditors’ job
performance32. Auditors’ performance associates
negatively with time budget pressure. The higher the
pressure, the lower the performance. Specifically, the
effectiveness of auditors to accumulate appropriate and
sufficient evidence deteriorate when time budget pressure
increase. Auditors’ judgement expertise also reduce
significantly under time pressure6.
“Audit managers and partners should be particularly
concerned with the possibility of underreported time and
incorrect or poorly documented audit work papers when
the time budget on the audit is very tight but the audit team
is able to complete the audit within budget”(p.38)27. This
implies time budget pressure emphasized on auditors could
be associated with high job stress resulting in poor audit
quality. Therefore, it is suggested that audit firms need to
3
seriously consider the threat time budget pressure poses to
audit quality. Thus, research question 6 is stated as follows:
RQ6. What is the auditor perception on the
important of budget achievement in
performance evaluation?
3. RESEARCH METHOD
Participants
The respondents were external auditors that are
registered with the Malaysian Institute of Accountant
(MIA) either in Big-Four firm or non-Big Four firm and at
various audit position in the firm. The questionnaire was
posted together with a postage-paid pre-addressed
envelope.
Measurement
The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections of
demographic information, budget attainability, budget
emphasis and respond to time budget pressure.
Demographic information includes gender, age, year of
audit experience, job position and type of audit firm. The
budget attainability, budget emphasis and respond to time
budget pressure were measured using items drawn from
Otley and Pierce37. Respondents were asked to indicate the
frequency of each variable encountered in the previous
year of audit work.
4. RESULT
Data were collected by means of a survey questionnaire
which was distributed to 1,756 MIA members that are
working as an external auditor in various firms and
positions. Respondents were guaranteed anonymity. 274
usable responses were obtained, giving an overall response
rate of 15.6% which similar to prior studies in Malaysia,
with response rate ranging from only 12.3% to
22.7%25,26,36,41,42. Furthermore, the low response rate is
expected and well acknowledged in various mail survey
studies across various research fields in Malaysia and
developing countries in view that participants are typically
reluctant to participate in mail surveys41,42.
Table 1 summarizes the characteristic of respondents.
Majority of the respondents are female (60%) and from
non-Big Four firm (85%). Almost half of the respondents
had 6 to 10 years audit experience (44%) and most of the
respondents were either at senior (46%) or manager (46%)
level.
Table 2 shows auditors’ perception on budget
attainability. They were asked about the budget in the
previous year. In general, majority of the auditors (61%) in
Malaysia who responded to the survey believed that time
budget is difficult to attain (attainable with considerable
effort, 49%; and very tight, practically unattainable, 12%),
Adv. Sci. Lett. 23, 356–360, 2017 RESEARCH ARTICLE

36% believed that budgets are attainable (very easy, 2%; only 28% (mean 2.01) of the auditors would at least
and attainable with reasonable effort, 34%) and 3% “sometime” engage in reduce audit quality practices, the
believed that budgets are impossible to achieve. Close results show that time budget pressure could have a
reviews of the results showed that 9% of audit director felt detrimental effect on auditor’s behaviour which
their budget in past year was unattainable, slightly higher consequently could influence audit quality.
than senior, manager and partner. However, ANOVA test
showed that there was no significant differences of Table 2: The Specific Time Budget Pressure Based on
position, F (4, 269) = 0.88, p > .05 on time budget pressure. Demographic Information
Perceptions of TBP Position Audit Experience (Year) Firm Size Gender
Big- Non Big-
Table 1: Characteristics of Sample Senior Manager Director Partner 3 - 5 6 -10 > 11 Four Four Male Female Overall
Time budget was perceived as:
No % No % Very easy to attain 3% 0% 9% 0% 2% 1% 5% 0% 3% 2% 2% 2%
Attainable with reasonable effort 28% 39% 28% 58% 29% 36% 39% 22% 36% 32% 36% 34%
Gender Firm’s Size Attainable with considerable effort 56% 44% 27% 42% 55% 47% 40% 50% 48% 49% 48% 49%
Very tight, practically unattainable 10% 14% 27% 0% 7% 15% 13% 25% 9% 11% 12% 12%
Male 110 40.1% Big-Four 40 14.6% Impossible to achieve 3% 3% 9% 0% 7% 1% 3% 3% 4% 6% 2% 3%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Female 164 59.9% Non-Big Four 234 85.4%
274 100.0% 274 100.0%
Table 3 showed that all positions chose to work harder
Auditing Experience Position in Firm under time budget pressure. However, manager chose to
Below 3 years 0 0.0% Junior 0 0.0% work on their personal time rather than request extra
3 – 5 years 92 33.6% Senior 125 45.6% budget as their second respond unlike other audit positions.
6 – 10 years 120 43.8% Manager 126 46.0%
Lower ranks auditors (senior and manager) tend to reduce
11 years and above 62 22.6% Director 11 4.0%
audit work which could affect audit quality under the time
budget pressure as evident from Table 3. As for the
Partner 12 4.4%
auditing experience, all auditors regardless the number of
274 100.0% 274 100.0%
years they serve in profession chose to work harder and
charge time spent properly followed by requesting extra
budget. The percentage of the auditors engaged in
Time budget pressure level is consistent to auditors dysfunctional behaviour is high for those who had serve
regardless their audit experience and gender. Majority of below than eleven years, 32% (3 to 5 years) and 30% (6 to
the respondents, either male (60%) or female (60%), 11 years).Similar finding were found for firm size and
having less than 11 years audit experience (62% for 3 to 5 gender. However, 31% of the respondents worked with
and 6 to 10 years of audit experience) or more (53%), non-Big Four firms tended to involve in reduce audit
perceived their last year time budget was difficult to attain. quality practices under the pressure of time budget
There was no significant difference between female and compared to respondents from Big-Four firms (8%). Once
male auditor although female auditors felt that the budget thing should be a concern to the profession is dysfunctional
was easier to attain (M = 3.26, SD = 0.76) more than male behaviours is a common practice among auditors in
auditors (M = 3.13, SD = 0.85). Similarly, ANOVA test Malaysia especially under the tight budget.
showed that was there was no significant effect of auditing
experience, F (4, 271) = 0.64, p > .05 on budget Table 3: Respond to Time Budget Pressure
attainability. Position Audit Experience (Year) Firm Size Gender
Big- Non Big- Standard
Response to tight budget Senior Manager Director Partner 3-5 6 -10 > 11 Four Four Male Female Overall Mean Deviation
One the other hand, 75% of auditors that worked with Work harder but charge all time properly 90% 83% 75% 73% 86% 84% 86% 83% 86% 92% 80% 85% 3.58 1.08
URT by working on personal time 81% 79% 58% 64% 78% 78% 79% 78% 79% 74% 82% 79% 3.38 1.17
Big-Four firm felt their time budget difficult to attain in Reduce the quality of audit work to meet budget 38% 21% 17% 9% 32% 30% 18% 8% 31% 30% 26% 28% 2.01 1.05
previous year compared to 57% in non-Big Four firm. On Request and obtain an increase in the budget 85% 72% 75% 82% 81% 79% 73% 83% 78% 79% 78% 78% 3.08 0.95
Shift time to a non-chargeable code 47% 48% 58% 55% 46% 48% 52% 58% 47% 51% 46% 48% 2.43 1.07
average, auditors from non-Big-Four firms felt that the Shift time to a differenct client 48% 32% 42% 27% 49% 35% 34% 18% 43% 48% 34% 40% 2.22 1.186
budget was easier to attain (M = 3.25, SD = 0.80) compared
to respondents from Big-Four firms (M = 2.93, SD = 0.76), With regards to budget emphasis, respondents were
t(272) = -2.41, p < .05. asked questions about their perception of the desired
importance of budget achievement in performance
The respondents were also asked how they reacted evaluation. Table 4 shows 30% of the auditors highly
when they felt a pressure from time budget. A summary of believed that their performance evaluation are based on
auditors who “at least sometimes” respond to time budget achievement of the time budget allocated to audit
pressure is presented in Table 3. Mean scores showed that engagement. Almost similar result (26%) found for the
the most likely response to time budget is “work harder but desired level of importance of budget achievement. In
charge all time properly” (3.58; 85%) followed by “URT general, budget achievement is considered by majority of
by working on personal time” (3.38; 79%) and “request the auditors as at least “quite important” as an indicator for
and obtain an increase in budget” (3.08; 78%). Although performance evaluation. The results indicate that either
4
RESEARCH ARTICLE

audit firms may use budget achievement as one important increase in the budget as respond to budget pressure.
criterion in promoting their staff, or auditors believe that it Although “reduced audit quality practice” is the least
is necessary to include budget achievement in their respond by the auditors under tight budget conditions, the
performance evaluation. fact that time budget pressure could negatively influence
audit quality cannot be ruled out. In fact, previous studies
Further tests were conducted to investigate any showed audit quality was compromised under tight budget
significant differences among respondents’ profiles in pressure7,19,37. With regards to budget emphasis, auditors
budget emphasis. There was no significant effect of gender are more willing to use budget achievement as their
(Male, M = 7.85, SD = 1.45; Female, M = 7.97, SD = 1.53; performance indicator. Support for this explanation is seen
t(272) = -0.63), firm size (Big-Four, M = 7.63, SD = 1.85; in the fact that 68% of the auditors perceived budget
non-Big Four, M = 7.93, SD = 1.42; t(272) = -1.14), year achievement as at least “quite important” in their career
of auditing experience, F (2,271) = 1.08 and positions, F ( development and 75% felt budget achievement should be
4, 269) = 0.27 on budget emphasis. part of their performance evaluation. The results may
associate with budget attainability, when majority of the
Table 4: Important of Budget Achievement in auditors feel time budget are achievable. Thus, high
Evaluation of Auditors’ Performance emphasis on budget achievement for performance
evaluation would not create tension among the auditors.
Actual (Perceived) Position Audit Experience (Year) Firm Size Gender
Non
Big-
Senior Manager Director Partner 3-5 6 -10 > 11
Four
Big-
Four Male Female Overall
This study is subject to limitations. First, the results of
Time budget was perceived as: this study may not be representative of the auditors in
Very important 33% 29% 46% 0% 38% 28% 23% 35% 30% 23% 35% 30%
Quite important 38% 37% 9% 83% 37% 37% 42% 20% 41% 44% 34% 38% Malaysia due to the small sample size. Second, majority of
Of Some Important 27% 29% 27% 17% 21% 32% 29% 35% 26% 30% 26% 28%
Of little importance 2% 5% 18% 0% 4% 3% 6% 10% 3% 3% 5% 4%
the respondents are from non-Big Four firms, which may
Of no importance 0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100% 100%
0% 0%
100%
0% 0%
100% 100%
0% 0%
100% 100%
0% 0%
100% 100%
0%
100%
also limit the generalisability of the results. Despite these
limitation, this study has added new knowledge to the
Desired Position Audit Experience (Year) Firm Size Gender
Non accounting literature, especially in the Malaysia auditing
Big- Big-
Senior Manager Director Partner 3-5 6 -10 > 11 Four Four Male Female Overall environment. Although related studies have been
Time budget was perceived as:
Very important 23% 29% 27% 8% 30% 22% 24% 30% 25% 24% 26% 26%
conducted in other developing countries and in Malaysia,
Quite important
Of Some Important
49%
26%
47%
22%
27%
37%
92%
0%
45%
22%
50% 53%
26% 21%
27% 52%
38% 21%
51% 48%
22% 24%
49%
23%
they do not investigate the association of auditor’s
Of little importance 2% 2% 9% 0% 3% 2% 2% 5% 2% 3% 2% 2% experience and gender on time budget pressure. In addition
Of no importance 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% to that, we believe that this study could be applicable to the
analysis of opinion evolution in a social network.
5. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
The aim of this study is to examine the existence of time [1] Ahrens, J.-P., Landmann, A., & Woywode, M. (2015). Gender
preferences in the CEO successions of family firms: Family
budget pressure among auditors in Malaysia at various characteristics and human capital of the successor. Journal of
positions. In general most of the auditors indicated that the Family Business Strategy, 6(2), 86–103.
budget was difficult to attain regardless position,
[2] Anderson-Gough, F., Grey, C., & Robson, K. (2005). Helping
experience, firm size and gender. However, there is no them to forget: The organizational embedding of gender relations
significant differences among auditors in various position, in public audit firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society,
years of audit experience and gender except for firm size. 30(5), 469–490.
The results indicate that auditors in non-Big Four firms felt [3] Betz, M., O’Connell, L., & Shepard, J. M. (1989). Gender
their time budget was attainable compared to Big-Four differences in proclivity for unethical behavior. Journal of
firms. This results may due to the fact that majority of Big- Business Ethics, 8(5), 321–324.
Four firms clients are listed companies22 with more [4] Campbell, M. C., Sheridan, J. B., & Campbell, K. Q. (1988). How
complex structure. It is clear that the level of time budget do accountants cope with stress? The Woman CPA, 50(3), 4–7.
pressure experienced by the auditors varies along a
[5] Carter, M. J. (2014). Gender socialization and identity theory.
continuum that ranges from very easy to attain to Social Sciences, (3), 242–263.
impossible to achieve. One possible explanation for this is
that auditors have little control over the level of time [6] Choo, F., & Firth, M. (1998). The effect of time pressure on
auditors’ configural information processing. International
budget on audit engagement21. With regards to gender, it is Journal of Auditing, 2, 21–33.
expected that female auditors will behave in similar
manner with their male counterparts under similar working [7] Cook, E., & Kelley, T. (1988). Auditor stress and time-budgets.
The CPA Journal, 58(7), 83–86.
environment3 and thus, the results of this study is not
surprising. [8] Cook, E., & Kelly, T. (1991). An international comparison of
audit time-budget pressures: The United States and New Zealand.
The Woman CPA, 53(2), 25–30.
The results also revealed that auditors seem to work
harder, under reporting of working time and request an [9] Coppage, R., & French, G. R. (1987). Handling stress in the
accounting profession. The CPA Journal, 57(6), 99–101.
5
Adv. Sci. Lett. 23, 356–360, 2017
[10] Coram, P., Ng, J., & Woodliff, D. (2003). A Survey of Time
Budget Pressure and Reduced Audit Quality Among Australian
Auditors. Australian Accounting Review, 13(30), 38–44.
[11] DeZoort, F. T., & Lord, A. T. (1997). A review and synthesis of
pressure effects research in accounting. Journal of Accounting
Literature, 16, 28–86.
[12] Ettredge, M. L., Bedard, J. C., & Johnstone, K. M. (2008).
Empirical tests of audit budget dynamics. Behavioral Research
in Accounting, 20(2), 1–17.
[13] Everett, J., & Tremblay, M.-S. (2014). Ethics and internal audit:
Moral will and moral skill in a heteronomous field. Critical
Perspectives on Accounting, 25(3), 181–196.
[14] Fisher, R. T. (2001). Role stress, the type A behavior pattern, and
external auditor job satisfaction and performance. Behavioral
Research in Accounting, 13, 143–170.
[15] Friedman, M., Rosenman, R. H., & Carroll, V. (1958). Changes
in the serum cholesterol and blood clotting time in men subjected
to cyclic variation of occupational stress. Circulation, XVII(May),
852–861.
[16] Gaertner, J. F., & Ruhe, J. A. (1981). Job-related stress in public
accounting: CPAs who are under the most stress and suggestions
on how to cope. Journal of Accountancy, 151(June), 68–74.
[17] Gallego-Álvarez, I., García-Sánchez, I. M., & Rodríguez-
Dominguez, L. (2010). The influence of gender diversity on
corporate performance. Revista de Contabilidad, 13(1), 53–88.
[18] Glover, S. M. (1997). The influence of time pressure and
accountability on auditors’ processing of nondiagnostic
information. Journal of Accounting Research, 35(2), 213–226.
[19] Gundry, L. C., & Liyanarachchi, G. A. (2007). Time budget
pressure, auditors’ personality type, and the incidence of reduced
audit quality practices. Pacific Accounting Review, 19(2), 125–
152.
[20] Houston, R. W. (1999). The effects of fee pressure and client risk
on audit seniors’ time budget decisions. Auditing, 18(2), 70–86.
[21] Hyatt, T. A., & Taylor, M. H. (2013). The effects of time budget
pressure and intentionality on audit supervisors’ response to audit
staff false sign-off. International Journal of Auditing, 17, 38–53.
[22] Johl, S., Jubb, C. a., & Houghton, K. a. (2007). Earnings
management and the audit opinion: evidence from Malaysia.
Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(7), 688–715.
[23] Jones, A., Norman, C., & Wier, B. (2010). Healthy lifestyle as a
coping mechanism for role stress in public accounting.
Behavioral Research in Accounting, 22(1), 21–41.
[24] Julizaerma, M. K., & Sori, Z. M. (2012). Gender Diversity in the
Boardroom and Firm Performance of Malaysian Public Listed
Companies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65,
1077–1085.
[25] Jusoh, R., Ibrahim, D. N., & Zainuddin, Y. (2008). The
performance consequence of multiple performance measures
usage. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 57(2), 119–136.
[26] Jusoh, R., & Parnell, J. A. (2008). Competitive strategy and
performance measurement in the Malaysian context.
Management Decision, 46(1), 5–31.
View publication stats
RESEARCH ARTICLE
[27] Kelley, T., & Margheim, L. (1990). The impact of time budget
pressure, personality, and leadership variables on dysfunctional
auditor behavior. Auditing, 9(2), 21–42.
[28] Kelley, T., & Seller, R. E. (1982). Auditor stress and time budgets.
The CPA Journal, 52(December), 24–34.
[29] Kornberger, M., Carter, C., & Ross-Smith, A. (2010). Changing
gender domination in a Big Four accounting firm: Flexibility,
performance and client service in practice. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 35(8), 775–791.
[30] Lai, M.-L. (2008). Technology readiness, internet self-efficacy
and computing experience of professional accounting students.
Campus - Wide Information Systems, 25(1), 18–29.
[31] Margheim, L., Kelley, T., & Pattison, D. (2005). An empirical
analysis of the effects of auditor time budget pressure and time
deadline pressure. Journal of Applied Business Research, 21(1),
23–35.
[32] McDaniel, L. S. (1990). The effects of time pressure and audit
program structure on audit performance. Journal of Accounting
Research, 28(2), 267–285.
[33] McNair, C. J. (1991). Proper compromises: The management
control dilemma in public accounting and its impact on auditor
behaviour. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(7), 635–
653.
[34] Mcnamara, S. M., & Liyanarachchi, G. A. (2008). Time budget
pressure and auditor dysfunctional behaviour within an
occupational stress model. Accountancy Business and the Public
Interest, 7(1), 1–43.
[35] Mohd Nor, M. N., Smith, M., Ismail, Z., & Nahar, H. S. (2015).
Unethical audit behaviour among Malaysian auditors : An
exploratory study. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and
Humanities, 23(S), 59–72.
[36] Othman, R., Abdul-Ghani, R., & Arshad, R. (2001). Great
expectations - CEOs’ perception of the performance gap of the
HRM function in the Malaysian manufacturing sector. Personnel
Review, 30(1), 61.
[37] Otley, D. T., & Pierce, B. J. (1996). The operation of control
systems in large audit firms. Auditing, 15(2), 65–84.
[38] Paino, H., Ismail, Z., & Smith, M. (2010). Dysfunctional audit
behaviour: An exploratory study in Malaysia. Asian Review of
Accounting, 18(2), 162–173.
[39] Pierce, B., & Sweeney, B. (2004). Cost- quality conflict in audit
firms: An empirical investigation. The European Accounting
Review, 13(3), 415–441.
[40] Robertson, J. C. (2007). Staff auditor reporting decisions under
time deadline pressure. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(4),
340–353.
[41] Salleh, A. L., & Dali, A. (2009). Third party logistics service
providers and logistics outsourcing in Malaysia. The Business
Review, Cambridge, 13(1), 264–270.
[42] Shaari, J. A. N. (2010). TQM: The Japanese way in Malaysian
companies. IUP Journal of Operations Management, 9(1/2), 99–
115.
[43] Trauth, E. M. (2013). The role of theory in gender and
information systems research. Information and Organization,
23(4), 277–293.