Interviews reveal how leaders address conflicting demands in quality control systems, suggesting pathways for effective change.
Although rapidly evolving, quality control (QC) systems are a poorly understood determinant of audit quality. We interview 27 QC system leaders to understand how they navigate the challenges they face in changing QC systems. We find that many challenges—including obtaining buy-in, evaluating costs and benefits, and advancing proactive over reactive changes—are caused by conflicting demands arising internally. Consistent with institutional theory, our data reveal that leaders respond to conflicting demands by seeking partial conformity (e.g., negotiating among stakeholders) or by altering the framing of the demands (e.g., using scientific logic to legitimize a QC change). Interviews of eight QC system users complement and corroborate our main results and suggest opportunities for future research. Our study sheds light on how firms update QC systems and informs practitioners, regulators, and academics of the forces that shape the evolution of QC systems. Data Availability: Our data are not publicly available to preserve participant anonymity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hayne et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: