Big 4, Next 4, and Smaller Audit Firms: Market Realignment
This paper reviews Cullinan and Du's research on auditor-client realignments among publicly traded companies between 2003 and 2008. It examines whether shifts in market share away from Big 4 accounting firms are driven by auditor resignations or client dismissals, and introduces a three-tier audit market framework that distinguishes Big 4, "Next 4," and Smaller Firms. The review summarizes the study's literature review, methodology, findings, and conclusions, noting that Next 4 firms resign at significantly higher rates, Big 4 firms charge materially higher fees, and auditor realignment decisions are predominantly client-driven. The reviewer also offers personal observations on the study's strengths and limitations.
- Introduction and Background: Overview of Big 4 market share decline and study scope
- Literature Review: Three-tier audit market and resignation versus dismissal drivers
- Methodology: Data source, variables, and analytical approach used
- Findings and Conclusions: Next 4 resignation rates, fee differences, and client-driven realignment
- Personal Observations: Reviewer critique of conclusions and demand-capacity gap
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The review follows a clear, logical structure — purpose, literature, methodology, findings, and personal observations — making it easy to follow and evaluate.
- The personal observations section adds critical value by identifying gaps in the original study, such as the absence of a formal conclusion and the underexplored demand-capacity tension facing Next 4 firms.
- The paper demonstrates disciplined use of the three-tier classification framework, consistently applying the Big 4 / Next 4 / Smaller Firms distinction throughout to reinforce the review's central argument.
Key academic technique demonstrated
This paper exemplifies critical article review writing — summarizing a scholarly source's purpose, methodology, and findings while offering evaluative commentary. The reviewer goes beyond description by identifying logical extensions the original authors did not pursue, such as whether Next 4 firms could reduce excess demand by raising fees closer to Big 4 levels.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief introduction to the topic and source article. It then moves through a structured summary covering the research purpose, literature review, methodology, and findings in sequence. The final section departs from summary to deliver the reviewer's own critical assessment, noting both the article's relevance and its abrupt ending. The structure mirrors a standard annotated article critique common at the undergraduate level.
Introduction and Background
"Big 4, 'Next 4,' and Smaller Accounting Firms: Resignations v. Dismissals and the Outcome of the Auditor Change Process" by Dr. Charles P. Cullinan and Dr. Hui Du addresses the issue of auditing services among publicly traded companies. The article begins by noting that there has been a general loss of market share by Big 4 firms, amounting to a decrease of roughly half — from 44% to 22%. The article examines whether this decline is the result of accounting firms resigning from clients or client decisions to change auditors.
The purpose of investigating these realignments of auditor-client relationships culminates in the more specific objective of the paper: to examine auditor-client realignments between 2003 and 2008 and determine whether they are driven by auditors or by clients. Furthermore, the research is unique in its focus not only on the traditional Big 4 vs. non-Big 4 paradigm, but also on a new tier of firms known as the "Next 4." Firms that are neither Big 4 nor Next 4 are referred to as "Smaller Firms."
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.