Is Silence Golden? Audit Team Leader Reactions to Subordinates Who Speak Up “In the Moment” and at Performance Appraisal

2018 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. 281-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark W. Nelson ◽  
Chad A. Proell
Keyword(s):  
Performance Appraisal ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Team Leader ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Performance Evaluations ◽  
Team Leaders ◽  
Speaking Up ◽  
Or Efficiency ◽  
Audit Team ◽  
Speak Up

ABSTRACT This paper examines audit team leader reactions to auditors who speak up about potentially important audit issues. Study 1 is a survey of interacting audit teams and provides evidence of higher performance evaluations for auditors who speak up. Studies 2, 3, and 4 are experiments examining team leader reactions to speaking up, both at the time speaking up occurs (Study 2) and later, during performance evaluation (Studies 2, 3, and 4). Results provide evidence that team leaders react with irritation at the time speaking up occurs, particularly if a team member raises an audit effectiveness issue that could increase audit effort. However, team leaders reward speaking up in performance evaluations, particularly when team members speak up about issues that align with the effectiveness or efficiency focus of the team. While supervisors' performance evaluations exhibit outcome effects, supervisors also reward speaking up, regardless of outcome. Data Availability: Contact the authors.

Team-Oriented Leadership and Auditors' Willingness to Raise Audit Issues

2016 ◽  
Vol 91 (6) ◽  
pp. 1781-1805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark W. Nelson ◽  
Chad A. Proell ◽  
Amy E. Randel
Keyword(s):  
Team Leader ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Speaking Up ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Audit Efficiency ◽  
Team Success ◽  
Audit Team ◽  
Speak Up ◽  
Audit Effectiveness

ABSTRACT This paper reports five studies examining audit team members' willingness to raise audit issues. The first study is a survey of interacting audit teams that provides evidence that team members are more willing to speak up when they view their leader as team-oriented (i.e., emphasizing team success as opposed to the leader's own personal advancement). Experiments 1–3 provide converging evidence that audit seniors are more willing to speak up to a team-oriented leader and about issues that are aligned with that leader's concerns. Experiment 4 provides evidence that the effect of team-oriented leadership on willingness to speak up is mediated by team members' commitment to the team leader and, to a lesser extent, by their identification with their team, but not by concerns about the immediate or eventual repercussions of speaking up. Together, these studies provide evidence that auditors' willingness to raise audit issues is affected by what the auditor has to say and how they think their message will be received, potentially affecting audit effectiveness and audit efficiency. Data Availability: Contact the authors.

It’s Not Only What You Say…. How Communication Style and Team Culture Affect Audit Issue Follow-Up and Auditor Performance Evaluations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad Proell ◽  
Youpin Zhou ◽  
Mark W. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Performance Evaluations ◽  
Communication Style ◽  
Quality Improvements ◽  
Upward Communication ◽  
Team Culture ◽  
Style Preferences ◽  
Audit Team ◽  
Speak Up

Auditors work in hierarchical teams in which effective upward communication is critical to audit quality. We provide evidence that audit seniors’ willingness to consider following up on information, as well as their evaluations of staff performance, are affected by how audit staff speak up (i.e., their communication style) and audit team culture. Namely, audit seniors consider follow-up procedures more and rate staff higher when staff assertively communicate issues, especially in more autonomous team cultures. Yet, audit staff prefer to use a more passive communication style and perceive a more assertive upward communication style as risky, suggesting a disconnect between audit seniors and their staff. Our results suggest the potential for audit quality improvements by better alignment of supervisor-subordinate communication-style preferences, especially in more autonomous team cultures.

The Association between Audit Manager and Auditor-In-Charge Experience, Effort, and Risk Responsiveness

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 121-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Contessotto ◽  
W. Robert Knechel ◽  
Robyn A. Moroney
Keyword(s):  
Audit Quality ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
The Core ◽  
Specific Experience ◽  
Primary Core ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Audit Team ◽  
Industry Experience ◽  
Jel Classifications ◽  
Core Role

SUMMARY Audit quality is dependent on the experience and effort of the audit team to identify and respond to client risks (risk responsiveness). Central to each team are the core role holders who plan and execute the audit. While many studies treat the partner as the primary core role holder, the manager and auditor-in-charge (AIC) are also important. Using data for engagements from two midtier firms, we analyze the association between the experience and relative effort of the manager and AIC and risk responsiveness. We find a manager's client-specific experience is associated with risk responsiveness for non-listed clients but find no evidence that the general or industry experience of a manager, or the experience of the AIC, is associated with risk responsiveness. The client-specific experience and relative effort of the partner is associated with risk responsiveness. These results suggests that managers can provide an important, albeit limited, contribution to the audit. JEL Classifications: M2. Data Availability: The data were made available to the researchers on the understanding that they will remain confidential.

scholarly journals Speaking up about care concerns in the ICU: patient and family experiences, attitudes and perceived barriers

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 928-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigall K Bell ◽  
Stephanie D Roche ◽  
Ariel Mueller ◽  
Erica Dente ◽  
Kristin O’Reilly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Perceived Barriers ◽  
Family Education ◽  
Speaking Up ◽  
Academic Medical Centre ◽  
Know How ◽  
Family Attitudes ◽  
Conflicting Information ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Internet Sample ◽  
Speak Up

BackgroundLittle is known about patient/family comfort voicing care concerns in real time, especially in the intensive care unit (ICU) where stakes are high and time is compressed. Experts advocate patient and family engagement in safety, which will require that patients/families be able to voice concerns. Data on patient/family attitudes and experiences regarding speaking up are sparse, and mostly include reporting events retrospectively, rather than pre-emptively, to try to prevent harm. We aimed to (1) assess patient/family comfort speaking up about common ICU concerns; (2) identify patient/family-perceived barriers to speaking up; and (3) explore factors associated with patient/family comfort speaking up.MethodsIn collaboration with patients/families, we developed a survey to evaluate speaking up attitudes and behaviours. We surveyed current ICU families in person at an urban US academic medical centre, supplemented with a larger national internet sample of individuals with prior ICU experience.Results105/125 (84%) of current families and 1050 internet panel participants with ICU history completed the surveys. Among the current ICU families, 50%–70% expressed hesitancy to voice concerns about possible mistakes, mismatched care goals, confusing/conflicting information and inadequate hand hygiene. Results among prior ICU participants were similar. Half of all respondents reported at least one barrier to voicing concerns, most commonly not wanting to be a ‘troublemaker’, ‘team is too busy’ or ‘I don’t know how’. Older, female participants and those with personal or family employment in healthcare were more likely to report comfort speaking up.ConclusionSpeaking up may be challenging for ICU patients/families. Patient/family education about how to speak up and assurance that raising concerns will not create ‘trouble’ may help promote open discussions about care concerns and possible errors in the ICU.

scholarly journals Evaluating the national multisite implementation of dialectical behaviour therapy in a community setting: A mixed methods approach

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Flynn ◽  
Mary Joyce ◽  
Conall Gillespie ◽  
Mary Kells ◽  
Michaela Swales ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
National Level ◽  
Team Leader ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Community Settings ◽  
Team Leaders ◽  
Implementation Framework ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach

Abstract Background The implementation of evidence-based interventions for borderline personality disorder in community settings is important given that individuals with this diagnosis are often extensive users of both inpatient and outpatient mental health services. Although work in this area is limited, previous studies have identified facilitators and barriers to successful DBT implementation. This study seeks to expand on previous work by evaluating a coordinated implementation of DBT in community settings at a national level. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) [1] provided structural guidance for this national level coordinated implementation.Methods A mixed methods approach was utilised to explore the national multi-site implementation of DBT from the perspective of team leaders and therapists who participated in the coordinated training and subsequent implementation of DBT. Qualitative interviews with DBT team leaders ( n = 8) explored their experiences of implementing DBT in their local service and was analysed using content analysis. Quantitative surveys from DBT therapists ( n = 74) examined their experience of multiple aspects of the implementation process including orienting the system, and preparations and support for implementation. Frequencies of responses were calculated. Written qualitative feedback was analysed using content analysis.Results Five themes were identified from the interview data: team formation, implementation preparation, client selection, service level challenges and team leader role. Participants identified team size and support for the team leader as key points for consideration in DBT implementation. Key challenges encountered were the lack of system support to facilitate phone coaching and a lack of allocated time to focus on DBT. Implementation facilitators included having dedicated team members and support from management.Conclusions The barriers and facilitators identified in this study are broadly similar to those reported in previous research. Barriers and facilitators were identified across several domains of the CFIR and are consistent with a recently published DBT implementation Framework [2]. Future research should pay particular attention to the domain of characteristics of individuals involved in DBT implementation. The results highlight the importance of a mandated service plan for the coordinated implementation of an evidence-based treatment in a public health service.

Becoming Active Citizens

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Braunstein
Keyword(s):  
Religious Discourse ◽  
Active Citizenship ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Speaking Up ◽  
Standing Up ◽  
Civil Discourse ◽  
Waking Up ◽  
Speak Up

Chapter 2 focuses on similarities in the ways in which members of Interfaith and the Patriots described their choice to become more active citizens, despite significant differences in their demographic compositions and policy demands. For members of both groups, this process involved waking up, standing up, and speaking up—acts that were described as democratic and sacred responsibilities alike. In justifying their choices and distinguishing them from alternatives, participants in both groups drew loosely on a “civil discourse” that valorized the qualities associated with active citizenship, while critiquing or distancing themselves from fellow citizens who chose not to wake up, stand up and speak up. In the process, they also drew on “civil religious discourse” that infused active citizenship and American democracy itself with sacred significance.

Organisational empowerment and assertive communication behaviours: a survey of Jordanian newly qualified nurses

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 419-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad W Darawad ◽  
Mansour Mansour ◽  
Tahany Al-Niarat
Keyword(s):  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Speaking Up ◽  
Structural Empowerment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Communication Behaviours ◽  
Speak Up ◽  
The Impact

Background: Newly qualified nurses (NQNs) face several challenges in their early years of practice. Being empowered and able to speak up against unsafe practice are two important pillars for practising nursing safely and competently. Little research has examined the potential correlation between those two dimensions in the context of NQNs in Jordan. Aims: To investigate the correlation between NQNs' perceived structural empowerment in their work setting and their willingness to challenge unsafe practice in some hypothetical clinical scenarios. Methods: A cross-sectional survey involved 233 NQNs, who completed a self-administered questionnaire between January and March 2016. Findings: Participants reported moderate levels of both perceived structural empowerment and willingness to speak up against unsafe practice. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the total structural empowerment score and the mean score for speaking up against unsafe practice. Conclusion: The findings highlight the impact of peer, managerial and overall organisational support on enabling NQNs to become more empowered and assertive. Concrete, collaborative and organisation-wide efforts must be considered to foster greater empowerment of NQNs, but also revisiting work priorities to include supporting and advocating assertive communication skills among the more vulnerable of the newly qualified cohort.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document