Printer Friendly

Turnover in public accounting firms: The effect of position, service line, ethnicity, and gender.

Executive Summary

Using actual voluntary turnover data of 40,310 employees during 1991 through 2006, obtained from a "Big-4" public accounting firm, this study examines the effect of gender, race, position, and service line on turnover. The results indicate that turnover is higher among women, African-Americans, senior and manager professionals, and professionals in the audit area, compared to men, Caucasians, partners, executive directors, senior managers, and staff, and professionals in the tax area, respectively.

In addition, the findings show that Hispanic and Caucasian females have higher voluntary turnover rate than their male counterparts, Caucasian males have higher voluntary turnover than African-American and Asian males, and senior and staff females have higher voluntary turnover than senior and staff males, respectively.

Objective and Contribution

Public accounting firms generally expect a high turnover rate of their staff. Although some turnover is desirable, it is also "costly and detrimental to firms needing talent at the managerial and partnership level (White and Hellriegel, 1973, p. 86)." According to Istvan and Wollman (1976, p. 21), "excessive turnover is often considered a 'plague' of the public accounting profession." According to Sorensen, Rhode, and Lawler III (1973, p. 42):
While some turnover of professional personnel provides for the infusion
of new ideas and an opportunity for promotion and also aids in
retaining and attracting client business, few firms would dispute the
desirability of reducing turnover, especially in the case of those
staff members who exhibit partner potential.


Turnover in public accounting firms has been the subject of many prior studies for the last 50 years (Grossman, 1964; Rhode, Sorensen, and Lawler III, 1976; Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman, 1987; Pasewark and Viator, 1996; Moyes, Williams, and Koch, 2006; Hall and Smith, 2009; Parker, Nouri, and Hayes, 2011). This study differs from prior studies; it contributes to the literature in its use of actual turnover data from a "Big-4" accounting firm over a 16 year period from 1991 to 2006.

The majority of prior research on this subject rely on turnover intentions of public accounting firm employees (e.g., Dillard and Ferris, 1979; Hall and Smith, 2009; Parker, Nouri, and Hayes, 2011) rather than actual turnover. Tett and Meyer's (1994) meta-analysis "calls into question the use of intention/cognition measures as surrogate of actual turnover (p.280)."

The meta-analysis conducted by Horn et al. (1992) showed that turnover intention and actual turnover is related in the .3 range. According to Tett and Meyer (1994, p.286), these levels of correlations between turnover intention and actual turnover "suggest limits in intent to quit as a surrogate of turnover."

Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate actual turnover of public accounting employees, using firm related factors of position and service line and demographic factors of ethnicity and gender.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. The next section provides literature review and the related hypothesis with regard to variables of this study, followed by the methods and results sections. The last section presents conclusion, limitations, and practical implications of the findings.

Literature Review and Hypotheses

Prior research has examined turnover and turnover intentions of public accounting employees using demographic determinants such as marital status (Barkman, Sheridan, and Peters, 1992), personality determinants such as personality differences between partners and other professional staff (DeCoster and Rhode, 1971), firm specific determinants such as team effectiveness, job pressure, and advancement (White and Hellriegel, 1973), and external determinants such as financial inducements by joining industry (White and Hellriegel, 1973; Half, 1982).

This study uses firm-related factors of position and service line, and demographic factors of ethnicity and gender, to examine voluntary turnover behavior of professional employees of public accounting firms.

Position

Istvan and Wollman (1976) interviewed 227 individuals who left public accounting firms. They found that 47 of 227 (21%) left in the third year of their employment (third year syndrome), and 53 of 227 (23%) left in the fifth year of their employment (fifth year syndrome).

Istvan and Wollman (1976) note that professional staff leave public accounting firms because they cannot take the pace of public accounting, or they had only joined a public accounting firm to get experience needed for CPA certification, were offered more money for less work, or could not see themselves becoming a partner in the firm.

Robson, Wholey, and Barefield (1996) obtained turnover data from the personnel files of three "Big Six" (Big Eight at the time of the study) accounting firms located in California, Arizona, and New Mexico to investigate if obtaining CPA certification had any impact on turnover.

The data for the study came from 405 employees who voluntarily resigned and had been hired from 1974 to 1984. They "found that the interaction of certification requirements and job duties affected early career resignation rates of accounting firm employees (p.397)."

Marxen (1996) sent a survey to 530 randomly selected individuals from "Big-6" public accounting firms alumni list. Responses were received from 121 individuals followed by a telephone interview. Marxen found that the majority of respondents joined public accounting as a stepping stone for future careers and gain a variety of experiences.

Finally, Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman (1987) found that junior staffs were more likely than senior level staffs (managers and partners) to leave the firm because of general cutbacks in staff, a high level of competitiveness, and maternity/paternity leave.

The findings of these studies suggest that positions within the firm affects turnover in public accounting firms. In particular, turnover should be highest among seniors because by the time they obtain experience for CPA certification and experience, entry-level staffs have moved to senior level. The related hypothesis in alternative form is:
H1: There is a higher turnover among seniors of "Big-4" public
accounting firms than other positions.


Service Line

Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman (1987) conducted a survey of 161 professionals who had left public accounting firms in the past three years of 1983 through 1985. They reported that tax professionals were more likely to leave because of better opportunity in self-employment than professionals in other functions (audit and consulting). Auditors were more likely to leave because of travel demand than tax and consulting professionals.

These researchers did not examine whether there were differences between various service lines. Purvis and Panich (1986) reviewed the personnel records of 509 staff professionals in several CPA firms and found a much higher turnover rate among auditors than tax professionals.

On the other hand, Barkman (1992) examining the personnel file of 2,979 accountants from 1980-1988 in 18 western and southwestern offices of national public accounting firms, found that turnover was higher among tax professionals than audit professionals.

Because of the conflicting results of prior studies, and since both audit and tax professionals may leave the firm because of different reasons, this study examines voluntary turnover of audit and tax professionals during a longer time period: from 1991 to 2006. The related hypothesis stated in alternative form is:
H2: There is a difference between audit and tax professionals of
"Big-4" public accounting firms in their voluntary turnover decisions.


Ethnicity

No study in accounting has investigated the effect of ethnicity on turnover decisions of professional public accounting employees. However, there are abundant studies of race and turnover in organizational behavior. For example, Ghiselli, La Lopa, and Bai (2001) examined turnover intention of food service managers and found that Caucasians had higher probability of short-term intent to leave.

Zatzick, Elvira, and Cohen (2003) examined personnel data from a Fortune 500 service company from January 1990 to January 1993 to examine the effect of race on turnover. They found that "individuals' likelihood of turnover decreases as the proportion of employees in a job from one's own race increases (p.483)." Their results also indicate that "turnover decreases as the proportion of employees from one's own race increases in the level above an employee's job (p.483)."

On the other hand, Lee (2012), using a large national sample, did not find any effect of race/ethnicity on voluntary turnover. In this study we examine if voluntary turnover is different among various race/ethnicity groups (i.e., Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians). The related hypothesis in alternative form is:
H3: There is a difference among various race/ethnicity employees of
"Big-4" public accounting firms in their voluntary turnover decisions.


Gender

The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (2002) reported that in 2001, women represented 42 percent of professional staff employed by all CPA firms, and the rate of turnover was higher for females than males.

The study by Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman (1987) showed that females were more likely to leave the firm because of dissatisfaction with firm direction, quality of job assignments, lack of guidance, overtime demands, length of job assignment, unfavorable promotion, physical illness, and maternity leave than males.

In a survey of employees of large public accounting firms, Padgett et al. (2005) found that despite the fact that a flexible schedule significantly increases the length of stay in public accounting firms, females continue to leave public accounting firms sooner than males.

Collins (1993) collected data for her study in two separate phases. The individuals who received and responded to the original questionnaire were sent another survey a year later. With this procedure, Collins (1993) could identify those who actually left the firm.

She found that female professionals experienced more stress (advancement and time demands) than male professionals, who only experienced advancement stress. This stress was associated with higher turnover.

Overall, prior research show that females have a higher voluntary turnover than males due to travel requirements (Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman, 1987), marital status (Barkman, Sheridan, and Peters, 1992), work-family conflict (Pasewark and Viator, 1996), working condition and lack of opportunities (Marxen, 1996), and stress (Scheuermann et al., 1997). Based on these findings, the related hypothesis in alternative form is:
H4: Females have a higher voluntary turnover than males in "Big-4"
public accounting firms.


Stovall (2011) contends that females may join public accounting "for the sole purpose of attaining their certification. Once certified, they leave the firm in search of better opportunities, including a more flexible schedule, to allow a balance between a family and a career (p.274)."

These findings suggest that voluntary turnover of females could be different based on position at the firm. That is, there would be a higher turnover among females at staff and senior level than compared to their male counterparts, but not at the other position levels. The related hypothesis in alternative form is:
H4a: Staff and senior level females have a higher voluntary turnover
than males in "Big-4" public accounting firms but not at other position
levels.


As discussed previously, Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman (1987) reported that tax professionals were more likely to leave because of better opportunity in self-employment than professionals in other functions (auditing and consulting).

In addition, auditors were more likely to leave because of travel demand than tax and consulting professionals. Since travel is one factor that affects female turnover (Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman, 1987), we expect females' voluntary turnover to be higher than males' in the auditing area.

On the other hand, since the main reason for individuals in the tax area leaving public accounting firms is self-employment, and females are shown to be less likely to leave their jobs for self-employment (Georgellis and Wall, 2005), it is expected that male voluntary turnover will be higher than females in the tax area. This leads to the following hypothesis, stated in alternative form:
H4b: The voluntary turnover of females is higher than males working in
the audit area, but lower in the tax area in "Big-4" public accounting
firms.


In a study of the effect of gender and race on organizational attachment, Tsui, Egan, and O'Reilly (1992) showed that the effect on organizational attachment was stronger for Caucasians and males than for non-Caucasians and females.

Cocchiara, Bell, and Berry (2006) investigated the challenges associated with career mobility for African-American and Latina women in organizations. They found that human capital investments did not equitably impact employment outcomes for African-American and Latina women compared to their Caucasian female counterparts and men across ethnic groups.

In addition, Bell and Nkomo (2001) reported that 51 percent of African-American women surveyed in their study felt accepted by their organizations compared to 81 percent of Caucasian women.

According to Smith and Joseph (2010, p.745), "To better understand the experiences of African-American women and men, it is also important to understand the experiences of their race or gender counterparts (e.g. understand African-American men through examination of Caucasian men, and understand African-American women through examination of Caucasian women).

As Hill (1999) and Spelman (1988) suggest, "focusing only on race or only on gender provides only a piece of the puzzle, but it is not the whole puzzle (Smith and Joseph, 2010, p.747)." Based on these studies, it is expected that gender and race affect turnover of females and males differently based on their ethnicity. The related hypothesis, stated in null form, is:
H4c: There is a difference in voluntary turnover among females and
males based on their ethnicity in "Big-4" public accounting firms.


Methods

Data for the study was obtained from one of the "Big-4" public accounting firms from 1991 to 2006. Data was provided for employees in the United States of America. During this period, the firm employed 214,604 individuals of which 46,640 left the firm. The data provided by the firm included gender, ethnicity, position, service line (1), birth date, and type of turnover (voluntary versus involuntary).

From 46,640 employees who left the firm, I deleted 34 observations due to inaccurate date of birth in the data set (2) and 6296 observation for involuntary turnover (3) which resulted in 40,310 voluntary turnover data for further analysis. For ethnicity, observations for unknown and one Hawaiian were removed, which resulted in 40,217 voluntary turnover data for further analysis (4).

Results

As shown in Table 1, there are differences in voluntary turnover based on position. In addition, Table 1 shows an average turnover of 19% during the period of this study (1991-2006), with seniors at the highest (31%) level and partners at the lowest (6%) level.

A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was run to test hypothesis one with percentage of turnover in each of the 16 years as the independent variables. There were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot for values greater than 1.5 box-lengths from the edge of the box.

An inspection of Q*Q plot of position and turnover indicated that data is not normally distributed for partners and staffs (ShapiroWilk significance of .029 and .035, respectively). However, the one-way ANOVA is robust to non-normality (Maxwell & Delaney, 2004).

Voluntary turnover was statistically significantly different between levels of position, Welch's F(5, 40.586)=150.948, p<.001 (effect size [omega] (2) = 0.89). The results of Games-Howell (5) post hoc analyses showed that there were significant differences among positions (p<.001), except for partners and executive directors as well as senior managers and staff.

The highest turnover was among seniors, followed by managers, senior managers and staff, and executive directors and partners. The results support H1.

Hypothesis two posits that there is a difference between audit and tax professionals of "Big-4" public accounting firms in their voluntary turnover decisions. Table 2 presents voluntary turnover data based on service line as well as data for all employees and percentage of turnover for each service line.

The results in Table 2 indicate that voluntary turnover is higher for Assurance and Advisory Business Services (AABS) than for tax, and this difference is statistically significant (t= 3.30, p<.01). These findings support H2.

Voluntary turnover could be higher in audit area than tax for a number of reasons. First, professionals in audit tend to travel more than professionals in tax. Second, there is more opportunity in the industry for professionals in audit than in tax. Finally, passing the CPA exam and getting CPA certification is more important in the audit area than in the tax area, which may hamper promotion.

Hypothesis three predicts that there is a difference among various race/ethnicity employees of "Big-4" public accounting firms in their voluntary turnover decisions. Five groups of ethnicity were provided by the "Big-4" firm: American Indians, Asians, Hispanics, African-Americans, and Caucasians. Table 3 presents voluntary turnover data based on ethnicity, as well as data for all employees, and percentage of turnover for each ethnicity group.

Table 3 shows that there are differences in voluntary turnover based on ethnicity. Furthermore, Table 3 indicates American Indians had the highest voluntary turnover during the period of study (23%), followed by African-Americans (21%), Asians and Hispanics (20%), and Caucasians (19%).

A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was run to test hypothesis three. There were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot for values greater than 1.5 box-lengths from the edge of the box. An inspection of Q*Q plot of ethnicity and turnover indicated that data is normally distributed (Shapiro-Wilk p>.05). Levene's test of homogeneity of variance was significant (p=.001); therefore, Welch's F test and Games-Howell post hoc were used for testing of H3.

The results showed that Voluntary turnover was statistically significantly different between levels of ethnicity, Welch's F (4, 36.597)=2.969, p<.05. The results of Games-Howell post hoc analyses showed that there was a significant difference between Caucasians and African-Americans (p<.05), with African Americans having a higher turnover rate than Caucasians. These findings support H3.

Hypothesis four posits that females have a higher voluntary turnover than males in "Big-4" public accounting firms. Table 4 presents voluntary turnover data based on gender, as well as data for all employees, and percentage of turnover for females and males.

The findings in Table 4 indicate that voluntary turnover is higher for females (21%) than for male (17%), and this different is statistically significant (t= 4.63, p<.001). These results support H4.

H4a posits that staff and senior level females have a higher voluntary turnover than their male counterparts in "Big-4" public accounting firms, but not at other position levels. Table 5 presents mean and standard deviation of voluntary turnover data for females and males based on their position at the firm.

Table 5 shows that the mean turnover for females is higher than males for all positions except for partners. However, only seniors and staff females are statistically significantly different than males. That is, senior females had higher voluntary turnover than senior males (t=1.90, p<.05) and staff females had higher voluntary turnover than staff males (t=2.53, p<.01). These results support H4a.
H4b predicts that the voluntary turnover of females is higher than
males working in audit area but lower in tax area in "Big-4" public
accounting firms. Table 6 presents mean and standard deviation of
voluntary turnover data for females and males based on their service
line at the firm.


Table 6 indicates that the mean turnover for females is higher than males for both audit and tax area. Females in the audit area had higher voluntary turnover than their male counterparts (t=5.08, p<.001) and females in the tax area had higher voluntary turnover than their male counterparts (t=3.51, p<.01). These findings support H4b for audit area but not for tax area. In fact, we found the reverse of our hypothesis to be true for the tax area. (6)

H4c posits that there is a difference in voluntary turnover among females and males based on their ethnicity in "Big-4" public accounting firms. Table 7 presents mean and standard deviation of voluntary turnover data for females and males based on their ethnicity at the firm.

Table 7 shows that the mean turnover for females is higher than males for all ethnicity groups except for American Indians. However, only Hispanic and Caucasian females are statistically significantly different than their male counterparts. That is, Hispanic females had higher voluntary turnover than Hispanic males (t =2.13, p<.05) and Caucasian females had higher voluntary turnover than Caucasian males (t =5.02, p<.001). These results support H4c.

As an additional test, a one-way ANOVA was run for females based on their ethnicity to see if there were differences among females belonging to different race group.

No significance between group differences were found, (F (4, 75) =.33, p>.10). However, the results of a one-way ANOVA for males based on their ethnicity showed significant differences.

There were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot for values greater than 1.5 box-lengths from the edge of the box. An inspection of Q*Q plot of ethnicity and turnover indicated that data is normally distributed (Shapiro-Wilk p>.05).

Levene's test of homogeneity of variance was significant (p =.001); therefore, Welch's F test and Games-Howell post hoc were used for testing of H3. The results showed that Voluntary turnover was statistically significantly different between levels of ethnicity for males, Welch's F (4, 35.194) = 4.522, p<.01.

The results of Games-Howell post hoc analyses showed that there was a significant difference between Caucasian and African-American males (p<.10) and Caucasian and Asian males (p<.10), with African American and Asian males having a higher turnover rate than Caucasian males.

Conclusions and Implications

This study investigates voluntary turnover among professionals of public accounting firm using data obtained from a "Big-4" firm. In addition, this study extends prior research by examining the effect of gender by position, service line, and ethnicity on voluntary turnover of professionals in public accounting firms.

An examination of 40,310 voluntary turnovers over the period of 1991-2006 indicates that there are differences in turnover among professionals based on position, service line, race, and gender. In particular, this study finds that the highest turnover was among seniors, followed by managers, senior managers and staff, and executive directors and partners.

Similar to the results of the study by Purvis and Panich (1986), this study finds that professionals in the Assurance and Advisory Business Services (audit) had higher voluntary rate than professional in the tax area.

The results also show that there is a significant difference between Caucasians and African-Americans, with African Americans having a higher voluntary turnover rate than Caucasians. In addition, the findings show that Hispanic and Caucasian females have higher voluntary turnover rate than their male counterparts, but no difference between other ethnicity groups.

As for the same sex and race turnover, this study finds no significant difference among various ethnicity females, but finds a significant difference between Caucasian and African-American males and Caucasian and Asian males, with African American and Asian males having a higher turnover rate than Caucasian males. Prior research (e.g., Zatzick, Elvira, and Cohen, 2003) suggests that working with others of the same race reduces the likelihood of minority exits.

The findings also support the notion that females have a higher voluntary turnover rate than males. The results show that senior females had higher voluntary turnover than senior males and staff females had higher voluntary turnover than staff males, but no other differences among other position levels. Females in both audit and tax areas had higher voluntary turnover rate than their male counterparts.

To alleviate voluntary turnover for females, Moyes, Williams, and Koch (2006) suggest that public accounting firms can reduce female turnover by providing a more positive work environment and increasing job satisfaction of their female employees.

These researchers also reported that the younger female accounting professionals perceive fewer advancement opportunities than the younger males. Therefore, better communication and mentoring of female professionals may reduce their voluntary turnover (Padgett et al., 2005).

To mitigate voluntary turnover, international public accounting firms could employ a few strategies including using an internal marketing strategy (Taylor and Cosenza, 1998), increasing job enrichment (Sorensen, Rhode, and Lawler III, 1973), using mentoring to "improve the ethnic and gender diversity of CPA firm employees" (Reinstein, Sinason, and Fogarty, 2012, p. 40) and using para-accountants for routine, tedious, and non-stimulating tasks (Half, 1982).

In addition, understanding the factors that affect career choice of entry-level staff could reduce voluntary turnover. The results of the study by Nouri, Parker, and Samanta (2005) indicate that the amount of travel and family life has a negative effect while salary, job variety, overtime pay, and professionalism/advancement has a positive impact on choosing a career in public accounting firms.

Limitations

The findings are subject to several limitations. First, this study uses data from one "Big-4" public accounting firm. Therefore, the results may not be generalizable to other firms, especially local and regional firms.

Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pitman (1987) find that employees of local/regional firms left the firm because of lack of opportunity for promotion, better opportunity for self-employment, client quality, and better opportunity with another CPA firm, while employees of national firms left their firm because of better opportunity in industry, professional burnout, and travel and overtime demands.

Future research can further examine this issue and see if there are differences among professionals based on the type of firm.

Second, the data was provided by the firm with no control over or cross checking of the data. The results would be affected if extensive mistake in classifications are in the data. However, since the data is an extensive turnover data (40,310 voluntary turnovers) over a period of 16 years, there is minimal possibility of classification mistakes affecting the results of the study.

Third, some voluntary turnover could be because of retirement, which is not considered in this study. In particular, voluntary turnover at the partner and senior manager level may be due to retirement, which may have affected the findings of the results. Future studies may examine turnover by separating different types of voluntary turnover.

Fourth, the data is over a large span of time (1991-2006) and does not consider the impact of major events, if any, such as the collapse of Arthur Andersen during this span of time. As explained in Endnote 4, the data provided by the Big-4 firm does not allow further additional robustness tests. Future studies may try to obtain more current and detailed data from the firms.

Finally, there is a possibility of three-way interaction among variables of this study which is not examined here. For example, there is a possibility that gender, service line, and position interact to affect turnover. Future research can investigate this and similar three-way interaction issues.

References

American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2002. The Supply of Accounting Graduates and the Demand for Public Accounting Recruits - 200, AICPA, New York, NY.

Barkman, A.I., J.E. Sheridan, and L.H. Peters. 1992. Survival Models of Professional Staff Retention in Public Accounting Firms. Journal of Managerial Accounting Issues, 4(3): 339-353.

Bell, E. and S.Nkomo. 2001. Our Separate Ways: Black and White Women and the Struggle for Professional Identity. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Cocchiara, F., M.P. Bell, and D.P. Berry. 2006. Latinas and Black Women: Key Factor for a Growing Proportion of the U.S. Workforce. Equal Opportunity International, 25(4): 272-284.

Collins, K.M. 1993. Stress and Departure from the Public Accounting Profession: A Study of Gender Differences. Accounting Horizons, 7(1): 29-38.

Dalton; D.R., J.W. Hill, and R.J. Ramsay. 1997. Women as managers and partners: Context specific predictors of turnover in International Public Accounting Firms. Auditing, 16(1): 29-50.

DeCoster, D.T. and J.G.Rhode. 1971. The Accountant's Stereotype: Real or Imagined, Deserved, or Unwarranted. The Accounting Review, 651-664.

Dillard, J.F. and K.R.Ferris. 1979. Sources of Professional Staff Turnover in Public Accounting Firms: Some Further Evidence. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 4(3): 179-186.

Gaertner, F.J., P.E.W. Hemmeter, M.K. Pitman. 1987. Employee Turnover in Public Accounting: A New Perspective. The CPA Journal, August: 30-37.

Georgellis, Y. and H. Wall. 2005. Gender Differences in Self-Employment. International Review of Applied Economics, 19(3): 321-342.

Ghiselli, R.F., J.M. La Lopa, and B. Bai. 2001. Job Satisfaction, Life Satisfaction, and Turnover Intent: Among Food-Service Managers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(2): 28-37.

Grossman, H.I. 1967. Public Accounting Employee Turnover, Report to the Annual Meeting of the American Institute of Public Accountants, New York.

Half, R. 1982. Keeping the Best--Employee Retention in Public Accounting. The CPA Journal, August: 34-38.

Hall, M. and D.Smith. 2009. Mentoring and Turnover Intentions in Public Accounting Firms: A Research Note. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34: 695-704.

Hill, C.P. 1999. Black Feminist Thought. Routledge, New York. NY.

Horn, P.W., F. Caranikas-Walker, G.E. Prussian, and R.W. Griffeth. 1992. Ameta-Analytical Structural Equations Analysis of a Model of Employee Turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77:890-910.

Istvan, D.F., and J.B. Wollman. 1976. Turnover in CPA Firms. The CPA Journal, 46(July): 21-25.

Lee, TH. 2012. Gender Difference in Voluntary Turnover: Still A Paradox? International Business Research, 5(10): 19-28.

Marxen, D.E. 1996. The Big Six Experience: A Retrospective Account by Alumni. Accounting Horizon, 10(2): 73-87.

Maxwell, S.E. and H.D. Helaney. 2004. Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data: A Model comparison Perspective. (2nd Ed.), New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Moyes, G.D., P.A. Williams, and B. Koch. 2006. The Effect of Age and Gender Upon the Perception of Accounting Professionals Concerning their Job Satisfaction and Work-Related Attributes. Managerial Auditing Journal, 2(5): 536-561.

Nouri, H., R.J. Parker, and S. Samanta. 2005. Students' Perceptions of Work in Public Accounting and Employment Preferences. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 14(3): 293-311.

Padgett, M. Y., K. Paulson Gjerde, S.B. Hughes, and C.J. Born. 2005. The Relationship Between Pre-Employment Expectations, Experiences, and the Length of Stay in Public Accounting. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 12(1): 82-102.

Pasewark, W.R. and R.E. Viator. 1996. Sources of Work-Family Conflict in the Accounting Profession. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 18:147-165.

Parker, R.J., H. Nouri, and A.F. Hayes. 2011. Distributive Justice, Promotion Instrumentality, and Turnover Intentions in Public Accounting Firms. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23:169-186.

Purvis, S.E.C. and R.L. Panich. 1986. Improving the First Year Retention Rate of Entry-Level Professionals. The CPA Journal, December: 101-103.

Reinstein, A., D.H. Sinason, and T.J. Fogarty. 2012. Examining Mentoring in Public Accounting Organizations. Review of Business, 33(1): 40-49.

Rhode, J.G., J.E. Sorensen, and E.E. Lawler III. 1976. An Analysis of Personal Characteristics Related to Professional Staff Turnover in Public Accounting Firms. Decision Sciences, 7(4): 771-800.

Robson, G.S., D.R. Wholey, and R.M. Barefield. 1996. Institutional Determinants of Individual Mobility: Bringing the Profession Back In. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2): 397-420.

Scheuermann, S.B., J.B. Finch, M.Y Lecky, and L. Scheuermann. 1997. Why Women Leave Public Accounting. Business Forum, 23(1/2): 36-39.

Smith, J.W. and S.E. Joseph. 2010. Workplace challenges in corporate America: differences in black and white. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 29(8): 743-765.

Sorensen, J.E., J.G. Rhode, and E.E. Lawler III. 1973. The Generation Gap in Public Accounting. The Journal of Accountancy, December: 42-50.

Spelman, E.V 1988. Inessential Women: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought. Beacon Press, Boston, MA.

Stovall, D.C. 2011. Women CPAs: From Retaining to Recruiting. The Business Review, 18(2): 274-279.

Taylor, S.L., and R.M. Cosenza. 1998. Reducing Turnover in Public Accounting Firms: An Internal Marketing Strategy. Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 17(2): 135-147.

Tett, R.P. and P. Meyer. 1993. Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Turnover Intention, and Turnover: Path Analysis Based on Meta-Analytical Findings. Personnel Psychology, 46:259-293.

Tsui, A.S., T.D. Egan, and C.A. O'Reilly III. 1992. Being Different: Relational Demography and Organizational Attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4): 549-579.

White, G.E., and D. Hellriegel. 1973. Attitudes of CPAs Related to Professional Turnover. The Journal of Accountancy, June: 86-88.

Zatzick, C.D., M.M. Elvira, and L.E. Cohen. 2003. When is More Better? The Effects of Racial Composition on Voluntary Turnover. Organization Science 14(5): 483-496.

Endnotes

(1) The data provided by the Big-4 firm separated the service line as Assurance and Advisory Business Services (AABS) and Tax.

(2) The 34 observations had date of birth from 1/1/1993 to 11/26/2029. Date of birth for individuals in the data set was from 3/13/1930 to 2/9/1985.

(3) The Big-4 firm providing the data identified the voluntary and involuntary turnover in the data set. Involuntary turnover was deleted because the focus of the study is on voluntary turnover.

(4) The Big-4 firm provided turnover data for individuals without their identifications. For all employees, data was provided in summary format by head counts. For example, the head count for senior white female working in assurance services in 2006 was 1066.67.

(5) Since Levene's test of homogeneity of variance was significant (p<.001), Welch's Ftest and Games-Howell post hoc analysis are used.

(6) ANOVA with an interaction between gender and service line was run and the results showed no significant interaction (p>.05).

Hossein Nouri, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, New Jersey

hnouri@tcnj.edu
Table 1:
Voluntary Turnover Data Based on Position

            Position              1991     1992     1993     1994

Voluntary   Partner/Principal      123       99       71       57
Turnover                             0        5        8        3
Data        Sr. Manager            226      258      260      242
            Manager                370      388      443      405
            Senior                1053     1103     1234     1059
            Staff                  479      419      414      399
            Grand Total           2251     2272     2430     2165
            Partner/Principal    1,506    1,401    1,334    1,288
All         Executive Director      10       52       72       91
Employees   Sr. Manager          1,542    1,446    1,417    1,445
            Manager              1,683    1,650    1,549    1,470
            Senior               3,310    3,159    3,013    2,947
            Staff                4,035    3,651    3,412    3,309
            Grand Total         12,086   11,359   10,797   10,550
            Partner/Principal        8%       7%       5%       4%
Voluntary   Executive Director       0%      10%      11%       3%
Turnover    Sr. Manager             15%      18%      18%      17%
Data        Manager                 22%      24%      29%      28%
            Senior                  32%      35%      41%      36%
            Staff                   12%      11%      12%      12%
            Grand Total             19%      20%      23%      21%

            Position              1995      1996     1997     1998
Voluntary   Partner/Principal       88        90       75       77
Turnover                            12         7       12       11
Data        Sr. Manager            252       234      226      253
            Manager                384       412      481      524
            Senior                1047      1123     1162     1146
            Staff                  357       397      345      452
            Grand Total           2140      2263     2301     2463
            Partner/Principal    1,323     1,352    1,381    1,477
All         Executive Director     118       162      201      202
Employees   Sr. Manager          1,511     1,619    1,739    2,015
            Manager              1,565     1,780    2,205    2,566
            Senior               3,006     3,239    3,953    4,270
            Staff                3,124     2,962    2,771    3,153
            Grand Total         10,647    11,114   12,250   13,682
            Partner/Principal        7%        7%       5%       5%
Voluntary   Executive Director      10%        4%       6%       5%
Turnover    Sr. Manager             17%       14%      13%      13%
Data        Manager                 25%       23%      22%      20%
            Senior                  35%       35%      29%      27%
            Staff                   11%       13%      12%      14%
            Grand Total             20%       20%      19%      18%

            Position              1999     2000      2001     2002

Voluntary   Partner/Principal       75      106       107      105
Turnover                            17       19        16       18
Data        Sr. Manager            304      380       291      291
            Manager                623      657       430      486
            Senior                1200     1311       806      996
            Staff                  611      655       408      457
            Grand Total           2830     3128      2058     2353
            Partner/Principal    1,561    1,588     1,600    1,701
All         Executive Director     236      273       330      393
Employees   Sr. Manager          2,341    2,381     2,464    2,545
            Manager              2,783    2,623     2,550    2,587
            Senior               3,952    3,736     3,734    3,995
            Staff                3,781    3,605     3,683    3,653
            Grand Total         14,654   14,206    14,360   14,873
            Partner/Principal        5%       7%        7%       6%
Voluntary   Executive Director       7%       7%        5%       5%
Turnover    Sr. Manager             13%      16%       12%      11%
Data        Manager                 22%      25%       17%      19%
            Senior                  30%      35%       22%      25%
            Staff                   16%      18%       11%      13%
            Grand Total             19%      22%       14%      16%

            Position              2003     2004     2005      2006

Voluntary   Partner/Principal      119      117      104        77
Turnover                            33       28       39        44
Data        Sr. Manager            340      432      354       288
            Manager                523      586      515       519
            Senior                1238     1357     1179      1203
            Staff                  480      648      648       785
            Grand Total           2733     3168     2839      2916
            Partner/Principal    1,730    1,715    1,742     1,791
All         Executive Director     425      421      419       418
Employees   Sr. Manager          2,540    2,364    2,283     2,348
            Manager              2,454    2,345    2,446     2,550
            Senior               4,135    4,153    4,330     4,774
            Staff                3,729    4,154    5,105     5,652
            Grand Total         15,014   15,153   16,324    17,534
            Partner/Principal        7%       7%       6%        4%
Voluntary   Executive Director       8%       7%       9%       11%
Turnover    Sr. Manager             13%      18%      16%       12%
Data        Manager                 21%      25%      21%       20%
            Senior                  30%      33%      27%       25%
            Staff                   13%      16%      13%       14%
            Grand Total             18%      21%      17%       17%

            Position             Grand Total

Voluntary   Partner/Principal       1490
Turnover                             272
Data        Sr. Manager             4631
            Manager                 7746
            Senior                 18217
            Staff                   7954
            Grand Total            40310
            Partner/Principal     24,491
All         Executive Director     3,823
Employees   Sr. Manager           31,999
            Manager               34,805
            Senior                59,707
            Staff                 59,779
            Grand Total          214,604
            Partner/Principal          6%
Voluntary   Executive Director         7%
Turnover    Sr. Manager               14%
Data        Manager                   22%
            Senior                    31%
            Staff                     13%
            Grand Total               19%

Table 2:
Voluntary Turnover Data Based on Service Line

Service Line    1991     1992     1993     1994     1995     1996

AABS            1549     1603     1721     1557     1491     1593
Tax              702      669      709      608      649      670
Grand Total     2251     2272     2430     2165     2140     2263
AABS           8,257    7,741    7,410    7,412    7,205    7,204
Tax            3,829    3,618    3,387    3,138    3,442    3,910
Grand Total   12,086   11,359   10,797   10,550   10,647   11,114
AABS              19%      21%      23%      21%      21%      22%
Tax               18%      18%      21%      19%      19%      17%
Grand Total       19%      20%      23%      21%      20%      20%

Service Line    1997     1998     1999     2000     2001     2002

AABS            1465     1600     1909     2131     1356     1656
Tax              836      863      921      997      702      697
Grand Total     2301     2463     2830     3128     2058     2353
AABS           7,625    8,564    9,207    8,788    8,735    9,205
Tax            4,625    5,118    5,446    5,418    5,626    5,668
Grand Total   12,250   13,682   14,654   14,206   14,360   14,873
AABS              19%      19%      21%      24%      16%      18%
Tax               18%      17%      17%      18%      12%      12%
Grand Total       19%      18%      19%      22%      14%      16%

Service Line    2003     2004      2005     2006   Grand Total

AABS            1914     2310      2031     2247     28133
Tax              819      858       808      669     12177
Grand Total     2733     3168      2839     2916     40310
AABS           9,834   10,644    11,964   12,900   142,694
Tax            5,181    4,509     4,361    4,634    71,910
Grand Total   15,014   15,153    16,324   17,534   214,604
AABS              19%      22%       17%      17%       20%
Tax               16%      19%       19%      14%       17%
Grand Total       18%      21%       17%      17%       19%

Table 3:
Voluntary Turnover Data Based on Ethnicity/Race

Service Line        1991     1992     1993     1994     1995     1996

American Indian        1        1        2        2        4        1
Asian                107      109      164      104      116      177
African-American      35       35       33       34       39       39
Hispanic              40       47       38       46       55       62
Caucasian           1987     2071     2191     1979     1926     1984
Grand Total         2170     2263     2428     2165     2140     2263
American Indian        5        7        9       10       12       15
Asian                518      550      544      565      618      732
African-American     137      128      137      143      145      184
Hispanic             202      209      217      229      248      283
Caucasian         10,876   10,422    9,882    9,603    9,625    9,901
Grand Total       11,737   11,316   10,789   10,549   10,647   11,114
American Indian       20%      14%      22%      20%      33%       7%
Asian                 21%      20%      30%      18%      19%      24%
African-American      26%      27%      24%      24%      27%      21%
Hispanic              20%      22%      18%      20%      22%      22%
Caucasian             18%      20%      22%      21%      20%      20%
Grand Total           18%      20%      23%      21%      20%      20%

Service Line        1997     1998     1999     2000     2001     2002

American Indian        6        6       10        8        8       11
Asian                198      210      298      363      236      245
African-American      40       77       91       98       70       82
Hispanic              73       73      100      115       77       85
Caucasian           1984     2097     2331     2544     1667     1930
Grand Total         2301     2463     2830     3128     2058     2353
American Indian       28       33       29       21       40       35
Asian                906    1,132    1,359    1,384    1,506    1,543
African-American     247      341      397      423      479      480
Hispanic             325      390      464      461      503      537
Caucasian         10,745   11,786   12,405   11,917   11,832   12,278
Grand Total       12,250   13,682   14,654   14,206   14,360   14,873
American Indian       21%      18%      34%      38%      20%      31%
Asian                 22%      19%      22%      26%      16%      16%
African-American      16%      23%      23%      23%      15%      17%
Hispanic              22%      19%      22%      25%      15%      16%
Caucasian             18%      18%      19%      21%      14%      16%
Grand Total           19%      18%      19%      22%      14%      16%

Service Line        2003     2004     2005     2006   Grand Total

American Indian        7        8        7        7        89
Asian                310      391      439      519      3986
African-American     104      129      136      169      1211
Hispanic             126      117      118      124      1296
Caucasian           2186     2523     2139     2096     33635
Grand Total         2733     3168     2839     2915     40217
American Indian       31       35       36       37       382
Asian              1,626    1,883    2,432    2,770    20,068
African-American     509      579      666      724     5,719
Hispanic             544      577      639      651     6,479
Caucasian         12,304   12,079   12,550   13,350   181,554
Grand Total       15,014   15,153   16,323   17,532   214,201
American Indian       23%      23%      19%      19%       23%
Asian                 19%      21%      18%      19%       20%
African-American      20%      22%      20%      23%       21%
Hispanic              23%      20%      18%      19%       20%
Caucasian             18%      21%      17%      16%       19%
Grand Total           18%      21%      17%      17%       19%

Table 4:
Voluntary Turnover Data Based on Gender

Service Line    1991     1992     1993     1994     1995     1996

Female          1009     1031     1136      955      946      992
Male            1242     1241     1294     1210     1194     1271
Grand Total     2251     2272     2430     2165     2140     2263
Female         4,415    4,160    3,982    3,854    3,898    4,076
Male           7,671    7,199    6,815    6,695    6,749    7,038
Grand Total   12,086   11,359   10,797   10,550   10,647   11,114
Female            23%      25%      29%      25%      24%      24%
Male              16%      17%      19%      18%      18%      18%
Grand Total       19%      20%      23%      21%      20%      20%

Service Line    1997     1998     1999     2000     2001     2002

Female           999     1060     1232     1339      912     1116
Male            1302     1403     1598     1789     1146     1237
Grand Total     2301     2463     2830     3128     2058     2353
Female         4,558    5,236    5,751    5,773    5,966    6,270
Male           7,692    8,446    8,903    8,433    8,394    8,603
Grand Total   12,250   13,682   14,654   14,206   14,360   14,873
Female            22%      20%      21%      23%      15%      18%
Male              17%      17%      18%      21%      14%      14%
Grand Total       19%      18%      19%      22%      14%      16%

Service Line    2003     2004     2005     2006   Grand Total

Female          1282     1481     1325     1308     18123
Male            1451     1687     1514     1608     22187
Grand Total     2733     3168     2839     2916     40310
Female         6,373    6,407    6,901    7,531    85,151
Male           8,641    8,746    0,424   10,003   129,453
Grand Total   15,014   15,153   16,324   17,534   214,604
Female            20%      23%      19%      17%       21%
Male              17%      19%      16%      16%       17%
Grand Total       18%      21%      17%      17%       19%

Table 5:
Voluntary Turnover for Females and Males Based on Position

Position             Females         Males
                     Mean   SD      Mean   SD

Partners             .0520  .02246  .0616  .01106
Executive Directors  .0713  .05132  .0670  .03037
Senior Managers      .1541  .04127  .1466  .02068
Managers             .2311  .04040  .2251  .03127
Seniors              .3296  .06440  .2931  .04183
Staffs               .1422  .01887  .1229  .02381
Total                .2183  .03373  .1720  .01838

Table 6:
Voluntary Turnover for Females and Males Based on Service Line

Service Line  Females        Males
              Mean   SD      Mean   SD

AABS          .2331  .03268  .1791  .02202
Tax           .1948  .03924  .1573  .01699
Total         .2140  .03354  .1682  .01720

AABS=Assurance & Advisory Business Services

Table 7:
Voluntary Turnover for Females and Males Based on Ethnicity/Race

Position           Females        Males
                   Mean   SD      Mean   SD

American Indians   .2388  .14184  .2451  .14498
Asians             .2132  .04398  .1971  .03466
African-Americans  .2305  .04423  .2086  .05329
Hispanics          .2181  .03915  .1899  .03563
Caucasians         .2180  .03485  .1686  .01845
Total              .2182  .03375  .1719  .01844
COPYRIGHT 2016 St. John's University, College of Business Administration
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2016 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Nouri, Hossein
Publication:Review of Business
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Dec 22, 2016
Words:7370
Previous Article:The use of excel iteration simulations in assessing risk of marketing new products.
Next Article:The effect of financing sources on the usefulness of financial reporting quality in guiding investments.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters