The purpose of this paper is to investigate the connection between the type of negotiation tactics auditors use when they ask their clients to make adjustments to their financial reports, focusing on three distributive and two integrative negotiation tactics, and whether the auditors identify with their clients.
A survey was used to capture 152 experienced Swedish audit partners’ perspectives on what type of negotiation technique they would use thinking about their largest client in a hypothetical situation.
The results show that the more auditors identify with their clients, the more likely they are to adopt two of the distributive negotiation tactics, conceding and compromising.
Building on the findings in the accounting literature that auditors’ identification with clients constrains their judgments, this study finds that auditors’ identification with clients also has an impact on the auditors’ initial selection of negotiation tactics.
