Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine circumstances under which auditors subordinate their judgment. More specifically, the authors investigate factors associated with auditors’ propensity to accept client-preferred accounting methods that conform to accounting standards but do not faithfully represent the entity’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows.

Based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB), the authors developed a survey that was sent to auditors at a non-Big 4 audit firm.

Main results suggest that auditors tend to agree with a client’s preferred accounting method when they anticipate little fallout from this decision, they believe they can easily justify the method, and they perceive that colleagues, shareholders and creditors would also agree with the decision.

Results benefit auditing standard setters and regulators and are relevant for accounting institutes and audit firms because practitioners can learn about circumstances under which auditors subordinate their judgment.

This study contributes to the audit literature by using the TPB to identify factors associated with auditors’ judgment subordination. In addition, it applies the TPB in a context where a client-preferred accounting method is considered acceptable but is not the most appropriate in light of the audited entity’s specific circumstances.

The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act sets new whistleblowing standards for internal accountants and external auditors who fail to resolve differences internally with top management on financial reporting matters. Whistleblowers are eligible to receive a financial reward under Dodd-Frank if they “voluntarily” provide “original” information and meet other criteria. Interpretation 102-4 of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Code establishes reporting obligations for external auditors to meet the requirements of Dodd-Frank. The purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate the standards to better understand the whistleblowing process. A review of the literature identifies areas of concern in deciding whether to blow the whistle. The paper contributes to the literature by integrating thoughts, ideas, and issues raised by prior researchers and considerations specific to the whistleblowing process. The analysis results in the proposal of specific unanswered questions about the process that can guide future researchers.

This chapter examines the relationship between four variables indicating ethical disposition – ethical sensitivity, ethical reasoning, concern for others, and egocentrism – and trait professional skepticism (PS) (Hurtt, 2010) among 119 first-year auditors. While there has been research addressing the link between ethical dispositional factors and state PS in auditors (e.g., Shaub & Lawrence, 1996), there is a lack of research into the link between ethical dispositional factors and trait PS (Hurtt, 2010). The results indicate that trait PS is higher in first-year auditors with higher levels of ethical reasoning, concern for others, and egocentrism. More ethically sensitive auditors do not demonstrate higher levels of trait PS, however. The results provide evidence that auditors’ ethical dispositions influence their ability to have the mindset necessary to carry out the investor protection role that requires adequate PS.

Forty-five years ago, psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a series of famous experiments on obedience and authority that tested individuals' willingness to administer electric shocks to a test subject under the direction of an authority figure. This paper discusses how Milgram's work on human psychological tendencies can be used to address subordination of judgment and other ethical issues in financial accounting and reporting, including accounting for income taxes. The teaching approach described relies on readings, videos, and mini-cases to give students an appreciation for the role of organizational influences on ethical decision making in today's accounting world. This teaching approach is innovative in its use of social psychological theories to address accounting ethical dilemmas, and its incorporation of contemporary international financial reporting standards and tax reporting issues into the ethics debate.

This study investigates the effects of personal values on auditors’ ethical decision making. Previous accounting research has investigated the value profiles of practicing CPAs and accounting students, and the effects of values on accounting students’ ethical decisions. However, the current study is the first to empirically address the role of values in the ethical decision processes of professional auditors. We surveyed a random sample of AICPA members to assess their value preferences and reactions to an ethical dilemma involving client pressure for aggressive financial reporting. Contrary to our hypothesis, personal value preferences did not influence auditors’ perceptions of the moral intensity of the ethical dilemma. As hypothesized, perceptions of moral intensity influenced both ethical judgments and behavioral intentions.

This study aims to examine the association between Iranian auditors' narcissism and the auditors' professional skepticism.

The authors' sample is comprised of 355 professional auditors working in the private and public sectors in Iranian firms in 2022. The authors use cross-sectional multivariate regression as the main methodology, along with the structural equation modeling (SEM) technique.

The authors find that a higher level of narcissism leads to a greater level of professional skepticism among auditors, which ultimately can enhance the quality of the audit process. The results provided via the robustness tests also supported this finding.

The authors' findings further the understanding of the role of narcissistic personality traits in improving professional skepticism among auditors of an Islamic and emerging country. In addition, audit firms and audit partners can also consider the findings of this study and enhance the effectiveness of audit processes by assigning appropriate employees with certain personalities to specific tasks.

Rest posited that to behave morally, an individual must have performed at least four basic psychological processes: moral sensitivity; moral judgment; moral motivation; and moral character. Though much ethics research in accounting has been focused on component two, ethical judgment, less research has been undertaken on the other three components. The purpose of this study is to focus on component one, ethical sensitivity, of Rest's four‐component model.

A sample of 156 accounting undergraduates was employed to investigate the ethical sensitivity of accounting students and the effects of their ethical reasoning and personal factors on their ethical sensitivity.

Results of this study show that accounting students vary in their ability to detect the presence of ethical issues in a professional scenario. There is no significant relationship between accounting students' ethical sensitivity and their ethical reasoning (P‐score). Accounting students characterized as “internals” are more likely to show an ability to recognize ethical issues than those characterized as “externals.” The results also indicate that an accounting ethics intervention may have positive effect on accounting students' ethical sensitivity development. Hence, an individual who possesses the ability to determine what is ethically right or wrong (high ethical reasoning) may fail to behave ethically due to a deficiency in identifying ethical issues (low ethical sensitivity) in a situation.

Whilst much research has concentrated on ethical reasoning and ethics education to enhance the ethical conduct of accountants, it is important that the profession and researchers also direct their attention and efforts to cultivating the ethical sensitivity of accountants. The findings of this study provide additional evidence to support Rest's theory of a more comprehensive cognitive model of ethical decision‐making and suggest a more balanced research effort in evaluating the ethical development of individuals.

A basic principle underlying the public securities markets in many countries is that the interests of investors need to be protected. Independence from their clients (i.e., client management) is supposed to make it more likely that auditors will protect investors’ interests. This paper examines the question whether acting in accordance with professional rules governing accounting and auditing is sufficient to provide such assurance. In addition to a set of rules, it is argued that investor protection requires that auditors possess, or act with, integrity. An analysis of the principle of acting with integrity, as contained in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct, shows that its formulation of the principle conflicts with the concept itself, and thus that the profession's commitment to integrity is questionable. Five recent and prominent cases are examined, which show that the required integrity may be lacking. The implications of a lack of integrity are discussed at the end.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how notions of disciplinary power manifest themselves in audit regulatory developments. When it comes to research on the relationship between audit quality and regulation, much of the prior scholarly work has kept to the positivist tradition of quantitative analysis under the guise of “economic rationality”. In contrast, this research takes an interpretive approach to provide an alternate and unique perspective, using motifs of Foucauldian power and control to illuminate the operation of external regulation in a South African setting. The paper examines what may be loosely described as a mandatory whistle-blowing duty imposed on external auditors.

Detailed interviews with some of South Africa's leading corporate governance experts are used to highlight the disciplinary effect of an auditor's duty to bring reportable irregularities to the attention of an independent regulator.

Blowing the whistle on irregularities contributes, not only to increasing the information made available to stakeholders, but to creating a valid expectation of auditors serving the public interest by enhancing a sense of transparency and accountability. Elements of resistance to panoptic-like control are, however, also present suggesting that, in part, the regulation may simply be creating the illusion of active reporting.

The research relies on a relatively small sample of subject experts and does not provide a complete account of regulatory developments taking place in South Africa and abroad. Additional research on the role of whistle-blowing in an external audit setting is needed focusing particularly on similarities and variations in interpretations of reporting by auditors from the perspective of more diverse stakeholder groups.

Mandatory reporting of irregularities by auditors can provided additional useful information for stakeholders and may contribute to demands for more effective reporting by auditors.

Arms-length regulation of the audit profession should not be seen only as a means of improving audit quality and the utility of audit reports. Powerful social forces are also. This research demonstrates how laws and regulations have a potential disciplinary effect on the audit profession that contributes to a restoration of confidence in the audit process after it is best by scandals, even if motifs of power and control are somewhat illusionary.

This research addresses the need for more detailed analysis of precisely how mechanisms of accountability and transparency operate in the broader corporate governance arena. The paper also contributes to the calls for more detailed, context-specific studies of audit. Finally, this paper is one of the first to employ a critical theoretical perspective on audit in an African setting, responding to the need for contextual, methodological and theoretical eclecticism in the area of corporate governance research.

EY's audit of German company Wirecard raises many questions about the quality of its audit. The scope and depth of the audit deficiencies have led some to call it: Germany's Enron. The authors review the facts of the case and raise broad-based questions that address EY's audit: what it did wrong, what other steps it might have taken to enhance the audit, and whether it can be characterized as a failed audit. The case provides learning objectives, implementation guidance, and answers to these questions. The authors believe that it can be used at both the undergraduate and graduate levels in courses dealing with accounting ethics, fraud in financial statements, and auditing.