Michael Favere-Marchesi
Simon Fraser University
Abstract: This paper examines potential sources of effectiveness gains, namely discussion timing and continuity, in the review process of a hypothesis generation task. Discussion timing compares senior/managers teams where review discussion is held concurrently with or post review. Continuity considers familiarity of reviewers and preparers, and compares senior/manager teams where managers had either prior involvement or no prior involvement with seniors. Performance of auditors in generating hypotheses in an analytical review case was measured to assess any change in effectiveness of the review process due to those attributes. The study found that the review process significantly increased the number of plausible hypotheses generated. Both post-review discussion and familiarity with the preparers were important sources of effectiveness gains in the review process. Even though the interaction of those two factors was not statistically significant, the combination of post-review discussion with a familiar preparer seems to lead to the most effective review process.
Back to Program
