AI-Focused Promotional Positioning and Client Attribution of Responsibility for Accounting Firm Service Failures

Accounting firms are investing heavily in generative AI and increasingly promoting these investments as central to their service models. While such messaging signals innovation and efficiency, it may also influence how clients assign blame when service errors occur. Drawing on attribution theory, this study employs a between-subjects experimental design to test whether clients assign responsibility for errors differently based on a firm’s marketing emphasis on generative AI versus traditional services. Participants read a scenario in which a firm-prepared tax return contained errors. In one condition, the accounting firm’s marketing highlighted its use of generative AI tools; in the other, it emphasized a focus on traditional services. The source of the error was left ambiguous. Participants exposed to AI-promoting messaging attributed more blame for the errors to the firm, perceived it as having greater control over error prevention, and judged the errors as more likely to recur. These findings suggest that promoting generative AI in firm marketing may raise client expectations about control and reliability, increasing reputational risk even when the technology’s role in an error is unclear. The study contributes to research on attribution in professional services and highlights a potential tradeoff: firms that emphasize technological sophistication may also be seen as more culpable when things go wrong.