Dennis Veltrop

Associate Professor

Dennis Veltrop is Associate Professor of Corporate Governance at the Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, and co-founder of BoardResearch.org. His research focuses on board effectiveness, governance dynamics, and behavioral auditing, combining insights from psychology and strategic management. He has published in leading journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Management, and Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. Dennis also collaborates with practice through BoardResearch, facilitating board evaluations and studying decision-making processes in supervisory boards.

Working in multiple teams: (how) does that work? According to estimates, between 65 and 90 percent of the professionals work in multiple teams simultaneously. This, for example, holds for professionals in health care, in research teams at universities and for knowledge workers in general. This way of working is also common practice within audit firms. But how does simultaneously working in several audit teams affect audit quality? And what factors increase or reduce audit quality?
This paper examines the relationship between the extent of knowledge flow during audit practice (measured by the local network clustering coefficient) and auditor compensation. We exploit a unique bipartite (i.e. two-mode) network composed of individual auditors assigned to different audit engagements from an audit firm for one full year to determine our local network clustering coefficient and auditor compensation data from this audit firm’s personnel records. Informed by social networks theory and determinants of wage in labor economics, we find a positive association between local network clustering and auditor compensation, which is both statistically and economically significant. Our results are robust to alternative measures of local network clustering coefficient, alternative explanations of structural holes and centrality, alternative linear specification and endogeneity concern. Furthermore, we find that this positive association may be primarily driven by seniors working on audit engagements. Overall, our results suggest that embeddedness within knowledge networks plays an important role for auditor compensation.  
KEY TAKE-AWAYS Audit firms rely on audit teams where memberships are frequently shared, shifted and dissolved. In practice, this means that many auditors are part of multiple engagement teams for a given period of time. This paper examines why and when such multiple team memberships (MTMs) may lead auditors to engage in audit quality-threatening behaviors. We analyze data from a survey of 202 auditors—ranging from assistants to partners—working at Dutch audit firms. Our findings demonstrate that serving on MTMs can undermine auditor learning, and in so doing leads auditors to engage in audit quality threatening behaviors. Analyses show that less resilient auditors—those who are less able to bounce back from experienced difficulties—appear most susceptible to these deleterious effects. In addition, exploratory analyses suggest that the negative effect of serving on many MTMs appears to be more pronounced for field-level auditors than for management-level auditors.  
Audits do not happen in a vacuum. They are co‑produced by auditors and governance actors. In practice, how these actors set expectations, handle unforeseen circumstances, and interact with one another often determines whether high audit quality is attainable. This practice note—based on interviews with experienced auditors—seeks to demystify how relational drivers shape audit quality. We highlight five findings and invite auditors and governance actors to share their views based on these initial insights.
No related podcasts.
No related news.
No related events.

Filter projects: 

Project Lead
University Filter
1 - 10 of 52 projects