CASE 6.6
CHARLES TOLLISON, AUDIT MANAGER
Synopsis
Charles Tollison was in the midst of completing a tough audit engagement when he was told by
his office managing partner that he had been passed over for promotion to audit partner. This was
the second consecutive year that Tollison, an audit manager, had failed to be promoted to partner by
his employer, a large international accounting firm. Although the office managing partner promised
to “call in all favors” to win a promotion for him the following year, Tollison realized that he had
Case 6.6 Charles Tollison, Audit Manager
268
1. Charles Tollison was an audit manager with a large international accounting firm who had just
learned that he had been passed over for promotion to audit partner for the second consecutive year.
3. Tollison also had a reputation as a “micro–manager” on his engagements and for often working
excessive amounts of overtime to complete his jobs on time.
5. Several years before Tollison was nominated for promotion to partner, his mentor, an audit
partner in the firm, had resigned and accepted a position with a client.
Instructional Objectives
1. To examine the professional work role of an audit manager with a large international accounting
Case 6.6 Charles Tollison, Audit Manager
269
firm.
2. To identify the key factors that large accounting firms consider when making partner promotion
decisions.
Suggestions for Use
The key issue in this case is whether technical skills or client development skills should be the
most important factor in determining whether an audit manager is promoted to audit partner. My
Suggested Solutions to Case Questions
1. Students typically have strong and often conflicting opinions on this issue. The majority of my
students generally maintain that Tollison was qualified to be promoted to partner given his strong
2. Tollison even admitted to himself that he probably did not have the profile that partners in his
firm were looking for in candidates for promotion. Thus, Tollison apparently was aware of the
“rules of the game” for promotion to partner. In some respects, he had only himself to blame if he
3. Following are criteria that my students have identified as being relevant to partner promotion
decisions with large international accounting firms: (Note: Many of these criteria overlap.)
a. Client development skills
b. Technical skills
Case 6.6 Charles Tollison, Audit Manager
270
c. Interpersonal skills
d. Dedication to the firm
What I like to do in class is have students identify a list of criteria relevant to partner promotion
decisions, such as the list just presented. After listing these criteria on the board, then we have a
roundtable discussion (debate) in which we rank order these criteria in terms of their importance.
This exercise forces students to make conscious decisions regarding which of these factors are most
important in partner promotion decisions and to defend those choices.
Rationally, one would expect smaller accounting firms to place different weights on the factors
4. The key advantage of an “up or out” promotion policy, at least theoretically, is the vitality that
it creates within an organization. That is, the members of an organization realize that to remain with
the organization they have to continually strive to improve, to continually make progress toward the
“next level.” This environment tends to spawn energy, creativity, and hard work on the part of an