Carl H. Lindner College of BusinessCarl H. Lindner College of BusinessUniversity of Cincinnati

Carl H. Lindner College of Business

Erik Boyle

Assistant Professor
Professional Summary
Erik Boyle is an Assistant Professor of Accounting. He joined the University of Cincinnati after completing a PhD from the University of Utah. He also has a B.S. in Accounting and MAcc from Brigham Young University. Erik’s research interests are in the area of auditing; specifically, he is interested in how third-party evaluations of auditors influence auditor motivations and decision-making. His dissertation investigates the impact of an auditor’s use of industry norms on client management perceptions of audit quality. His teaching experience includes both auditing and fraud examination. Prior to a career in academia, Erik worked in the audit practice at KPMG. During his time there he worked with clients in the financial services, healthcare, retail, manufacturing, and government industries. He is currently licensed as a CPA in the state of Utah.
Contact Information
E-mail:
Office:
304 Carl H. Lindner Hall
Phone:
513-556-6363
Fax:
513-556-6278
Education

Institution:
University of Utah
Location:
Salt Lake City, UT
Major:
Business Administration
Dissertation:
Management Perceptions of Audit Quality: A Qualitative and Quantitative Investigation
Completed:
2015
Degree:
Ph D


Institution:
Brigham Young University
Location:
Provo, UT
Major:
Accounting
Completed:
2006
Degree:
BS


Institution:
Brigham Young University
Location:
Provo, UT
Major:
Professional accounting
Completed:
2006
Degree:
Other


Research in progress

Title:
Can Accounting Firm Interpretive Guidance Shield Auditors from Negative Litigation Outcomes when Accounting Standards are Ambiguous?

Description:
Some accounting standards provide guidance that is ambiguous, which may encourage auditors to rely on other sources to support decisions made under these standards. In this experiment, participants take on the role of a juror in a lawsuit against an audit firm. The auditor is accused of allowing a client to use an improper lease classification method. Two factors are manipulated: the justification method used by the auditor (professional judgment, firm guidance, and industry norms) and the ambiguity of the accounting standards (low and high). I find that auditors who use firm guidance to support their decisions are rated as lower in quality when compared to those who use industry norms and similarly to those who use professional judgment. I also find auditors who use industry norms are assessed lower damages and are less likely to be assessed a guilty verdict. Additionally, I find that jurors have difficulty differentiating between low and high ambiguity in the accounting standards, which provides evidence that jurors are unable to fully understand complex accounting issues in a trial. Thus, other factors in an audit, such as the justification method used for decisions, take on increased importance in evaluating audit quality. I contribute to the literature on auditor justification methods and the potential impact of juror perceptions of audit quality on auditor decisions.

Status:
On-Going

Research Type:
Scholarly


Title:
Examining the Impact of Industry Norms on Management Perceptions of Audit Quality Under Imprecise Accounting Guidance

Description:
I investigate whether an auditor’s use of industry norms as a justification method under imprecise accounting standards increases management perceptions of audit quality. Using accounting alumni from a large public university as management participants, I find evidence that, although management views industry norms to be a more credible justification method than an auditor’s individual professional judgment, management evaluates audit quality based on underlying accounting attributes when accounting standards are more precise. When accounting standards are more precise, however, an auditor’s use of industry norms increases management perceptions of audit quality. Thus, in imprecise settings, auditors are incentivized to engage in herding behavior by defaulting to the use of industry norms. Understanding this incentive is especially important as the United States moves toward the use of a more principles-based accounting framework, because the shift from a rules-based framework to a principles-based framework is likely to decrease the level of precision in the accounting standards. This study contributes to our understanding of how auditor decisions can impact management perceptions of audit quality and provides insight into one possible outcome of decreased precision in the accounting standards. Additionally, I provide evidence that accounting alumni can be a good source of experimental participants to proxy as members of management.

Status:
On-Going

Research Type:
Scholarly


Title:
Forgiveness or Betrayal? An Investigation Into Investors’ Reactions of CSR Firms Following an Announcement of an Accounting Misstatement

Description:
We investigate investor reactions to misstatements for firms that voluntarily provide corporate social responsibility reports (CSR). We rely upon Stereotype Content Theory and Betrayal Aversion Theory to predict that investor reactions to misstatements will differ based on the level of CSR performance (Average, High) and misstatement type (Unintentional, Intentional). We expect that high CSR firms are more likely to be forgiven for unintentional misstatements but are more likely to generate feelings of betrayal in investors for intentional misstatements. These feelings of betrayal are expected to decrease the likelihood of forgiveness for intentional misstatements. We conduct an experiment with non-professional investors recruited through Amazon's Mturk to test our hypotheses. Participants are asked to evaluate their desired investment relationship with a CSR reporting firm (either average or high) that reports a misstatement (either intentional or unintentional).

Status:
On-Going

Research Type:
Scholarly


Title:
Management Perceptions of Audit Quality: A Survey Approach

Description:
Audit quality is an important topic for auditors, regulators, and academics. I survey members of management to better understand their perspective on what audit quality is and how auditors are able to demonstrate it on their engagements. Management’s views on audit quality are important because of the key role they assume in coordinating audit engagements. They are also perceived as a critical voice in the hiring and firing of auditors; thus, auditors have incentives to understand how management evaluates their work. I find that management defines audit quality primarily through the characteristics of the auditor, the audit processes used on an engagement, and the outcomes of the audit. When asked how auditors demonstrate audit quality, however, management focuses mostly on auditor characteristics and processes, while largely ignoring the outcomes of the audit. In addition to surveying management about audit quality, I also obtain early feedback on management’s perceptions of the relevance of the CAQ’s Audit Quality Indicators. Management perceives the indicators related to auditor characteristics and processes as most relevant to determining audit quality. Outcome measures, such as PCAOB inspection reports, are viewed as least informative.

Status:
On-Going

Research Type:
Scholarly


Title:
Sport, Sentiment, and Audit

Description:
You can access the Sports/Auditing survey by copying and pasting the following URL into your web browser: http://cincinnati.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1Fy7BROUnSH2uPj

Status:
Planning

Research Type:
Scholarly


Title:
The Impact of Audits in Reducing Intentional and Unintentional Error in Financial Statements

Description:
A primary purpose of financial statement audits is to improve the quality of financial reporting by reducing errors, which can be intentional or unintentional in nature. Intentional error occurs when managers seek to alter financial statement data to achieve a preferred outcome. In contrast, unintentional error is the result of accidental errors or omissions. Although prior research has found that audits of private companies reduce financial reporting errors, research on the role of audits in reducing public-company financial statement error has been limited. Thus, we examine the effectiveness of public-company audits in reducing overall error, as well as intentional and unintentional error.

Status:
On-Going

Research Type:
Scholarly


Presentations

Title:
Forgiveness or Betrayal? An Investigation Into Investors’ Reactions of CSR Firms Following an Announcement of an Accounting Misstatement
Organization:
Brigham Young University
Location:
Provo, UT
Year:
2016


Title:
Examining the Impact of Industry Norms on Management Perceptions of Audit Quality under Imprecise Accounting Guidance
Organization:
American Accounting Association
Location:
New York City, NY
Year:
2016


Title:
The Impact of Audits in Reducing Financial Statement Error
Organization:
Brigham Young University
Location:
Provo, UT
Year:
2015