Search results

The importance of auditors blowing the whistle when they encounter a situation of perceived wrongdoing cannot be overstated. Unfortunately, however, the initial report of wrongdoing is often insufficient to remedy the situation. Thus, this chapter investigates auditors’ whistleblowing persistence, measured as the number of times an auditor is willing to repeatedly report the wrongdoing, if he/she is not satisfied with the initial and/or subsequent responses received. Specifically, this chapter examines auditors’ persistence when reporting the wrongdoing of a peer auditor on the same audit team. Results show communication medium utilized within the audit team (instant message vs video) and client importance (high vs low) influence persistence in a 2 × 2 experiment. The manipulation for communication medium uses actual prerecorded videos and instant messages. Results related to one of our four hypotheses show that whistleblowing persistence is affected by client importance; that is, auditors are more likely to persist in reporting when working on a less important client. Furthermore, the findings suggest that client importance and communication medium interact such that communication medium affects persistence on more important clients, but not less important clients. Specifically, when working on a more important client, auditors are more likely to persist in reporting when interacting with their peers via video compared to via instant message. Given that whistleblowing persistence is often necessary to obtain a satisfactory resolution to the issue at hand, our results suggest avenues to encourage whistleblowing persistence should be further explored.

This whistleblowing case study engages students in discussions about when and how to disclose differences of opinion on a revenue recognition matter with higher-ups in an organization. Factors to consider include the morality of whistleblowing, confidentiality obligations, the rules of conduct in the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Code, Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX), Dodd–Frank, and the US Supreme Court ruling in Digital Realty, Inc. v. Somers that addresses when to report matters to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Case questions are designed to promote students’ critical thinking skills, ethical reasoning skills, and decision-making. A flowchart of AICPA ethics rule 2.130.020 (Subordination of Judgment) provides the framework for making decisions when differences exist in financial reporting. The case provides learning objectives, implementation guidance, and teaching notes. The case was used in an accounting ethics course taught at the undergraduate senior level but can also be used in auditing, fraud examination, and advanced financial reporting courses.

This chapter discusses the findings of doctoral research into further education lecturers' and middle managers' perceptions of how Continuing Professional Development (CPD) in the sector is planned and implemented. Thematic analysis revealed that mandatory CPD is perceived to: involve conflicting purposes between those planning it and its recipients (deriving from divergent understandings of professionalism and the role of CPD among stakeholders); and be characterised as mostly generic, didactic, and ineffective, leading lecturers to compensate by engaging in additional, separate forms of CPD. This chapter demonstrates the value of practice-based doctoral study in enabling the voices of educators to be positioned at the centre of an exploration of their own professional learning.

Little research is devoted to how salary allocation processes interfere with gender inequality in talent development in universities. Administrative data from a university indicated a substantial salary gap between men and women academics, which partially could be explained by the unequal distribution of men and women in the academic job levels after acquiring a PhD, from lecturer to full professor, with men being overrepresented in the higher job levels, as well as in the more senior positions within each job level. We demonstrated how a lack of transparency, consistency and accountability can disqualify apparent fair, merit-based salary decisions and result in biased gender differences in job and salary levels. This chapter reflects on how salary decisions matter for the recognition of talent and should be an integral part of talent management.

Research regarding life in rural coastal communities in England has been limited, while the experience of families further marginalised by disability has been unresearched. To address this topic, a qualitative study was undertaken to explore the lives of families living with autism in rural coastal England. Twenty-two families from Cornwall and West Norfolk were interviewed in early 2019, including young people on the autism spectrum, their siblings, parents (some of whom were themselves also on the spectrum) and grandparents.

Perceived benefits of living in a rural coastal space were identified. These included the location, the sense of community and the sense of ‘going back in time’ as a positive experience. However, families also spoke of barriers and challenges associated with negative aspects of the location, the experience of stigma and intersectionality in relation to autism and rural coastal spaces. Difficulties concerning education, health and social care support were worsened by poor local infrastructure and the impact of a decade of austerity.

The qualitative methodology involving collaboration with families with autism in developing the research tools, participant recruitment and stakeholder validation is considered.

This research explored the intersecting impacts of rurality, coastality and disability to provide a novel and more nuanced understanding of such families' experiences. As such, it contributes to our understanding of those living ‘on the edge’ – regarding physical location, societal and educational marginalisation.