ABSTRACT: Most auditor client management (ACM) negotiations occur between partners and client management; however, managers also attempt to resolve issues with client management. Given that ACM negotiation impacts the financial statements, an understanding of whether the intended negotiation strategies of partners and managers differ is important. A key feature of the ACM setting is that partners have more power/status and experience than managers. Prior research provides conflicting predictions about the use of integrative strategies based on experience or power/status. Our results, consistent with the power/status hypothesis, demonstrate managers are more likely than partners to intend to use integrative strategies. Conversely, research on distributive strategies provides similar predictions for partner/manager strategy usage for experience and power/status. We find partners are more likely to intend to use the contending strategy and managers are more likely to intend to use the compromising and concessionary strategies. However, these findings are dependent on accounting context.
