Search results

To describe the new EU Whistleblowing Directive and its implications.

Describes organizations to which the Directive applies, the scope of reportable whistleblowing concerns, whistleblowers’ reporting channels and mechanisms, whistleblower protections, how organizations should respond to whistleblower reports and how organizations should prepare for the new rules.

The new Directive will require Member States to create rules for organizations with more than 50 workers, will mandate such organizations to implement whistleblowing hotlines for reporting a broad range of EU law violations, and will contain minimum standards on how to respond to and handle any concerns raised by whistleblowers.

Organizations in the EU can and should start taking initial steps to prepare for the new rules as soon as possible. There will likely be some differences among whistleblower rules in individual EU Member States.

Practical guidance from experienced corporate, technology, media, telecommunications and compliance lawyer.

The aim of the paper is to consider the efficacy of requiring a public interest test to be satisfied before protection is afforded to workers who blow the whistle under Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996).

Not all definitions of whistleblowing require there to be a public interest in the disclosure of information. To illustrate how the expression “public interest” has been used in this context, the common law defence to an action for breach of confidence is outlined. The paper then explains how the concept of “public interest whistleblowing” evolved in other jurisdictions. It also examines the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to see if it helps us to apply the public interest test. Finally, this test is considered in the context of UK legislation.

Several sources of uncertainty are identified. These include the fact that personal and public interest matters may be intertwined and that an organization may encourage the internal reporting of concerns about wrongdoing that do not have a public dimension to further its private interests. One obvious result of uncertainty is that those who are not legally required to report wrongdoing may choose not to do so and society may be denied important information; for example, about serious health and safety risks or financial scandals.

It is suggested that the public interest test should be removed from Part IVA ERA 1996. However, this test is likely to remain for a while, so nine recommendations about how it should be interpreted are made.

For over three decades, researchers have sought to identify factors influencing employees’ responses to wrongdoing in work settings, including organizational, contextual, and individual factors. In focusing predominantly on understanding whistle-blowing responses, however, researchers have tended to neglect inquiry into employees’ decisions to withhold concerns. The major purpose of this study was to explore the factors that influenced how staff members responded to a series of adverse events in a healthcare setting in Australia, with a particular focus on the role of perceptions and emotions.

Based on publicly accessible transcripts taken from a government inquiry that followed the event, we employed a modified grounded theory approach to explore the nature of the adverse events and how employees responded emotionally and behaviorally; we focused in particular on how organizational and contextual factors shaped key employee perceptions and emotions encouraging silence.

Our results revealed that staff members became aware of a range of adverse events over time and responded in a variety of ways, including disclosure to trusted others, confrontation, informal reporting, formal reporting, and external whistle-blowing. Based on this analysis, we developed a model of how organizational and contextual factors shape employee perceptions and emotions leading to employee silence in the face of wrongdoing.

Although limited to publicly available transcripts only, our findings provide support for the idea that perceptions and emotions play important roles in shaping employees’ responses to adverse events at work, and that decisions about whether to voice concerns about wrongdoing is an ongoing process, influenced by emotions, sensemaking, and critical events.

Explains the implications for management accountants′ ethical responsibilities following the restructuring of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Code. In order to enable management accountants to integrate their work more effectively with internal and external auditors, changes are recommended in the National Association of Accountants (NAA) Code of Standards.

This study aims to determine the performance of the Pakistani financial intelligence unit in combating money laundering/terrorist financing in local and global contexts.

The study used a qualitative research design. The objective is achieved by critically examining the Anti-money Laundering Act and its relevant clauses concerning the financial monitoring unit and other related legislation. Further, empirical data was collected through semi-structured interviews with chief compliance officers from regulated entities, regulators and premier law enforcer.

The performance of the financial monitoring unit has severe issues concerning the dissemination of financial intelligence due to its time taking behaviour, non-sharing of feedback with reporting agencies, dearth of international cooperation, lack of trained and relevant personnel and financial constraints.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is a maiden study concerning financial monitoring unit in Pakistan.

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.

This paper examines the role of professional associations, governmental agencies, and international accounting and auditing bodies in promulgating standards to deter and detect fraud, domestically and abroad. Specifically, it focuses on the role played by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA), the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE), the US Government Accounting Office (GAO), and other national and foreign professional associations, in promulgating auditing standards and procedures to prevent fraud in financial statements and other white‐collar crimes. It also examines several fraud cases and the impact of management and employee fraud on the various business sectors such as insurance, banking, health care, and manufacturing, as well as the role of management, the boards of directors, the audit committees, auditors, and fraud examiners and their liability in the fraud prevention and investigation.

Whistle-blowing has the important role of reducing the prevalence and impact of wrongdoing in organisations. The purpose of this paper is to utilise a very large survey of Australian Public Service (APS) workers to replicate the findings of previous studies in relation to whistle-blowing likelihood and to extend the quantitative findings in relation to whistle-blowing antecedents to include ethnicity or cultural marginalisation and occupational and professional role and affiliation.

The authors utilise the 2014 APS Census, a large data set containing 100,000 observations relating to employee engagement, leadership, health, satisfaction and general impressions of the public service. Logistic regression is employed to obtain estimates and marginal effects in respect to predictors for whistle-blowing. The authors determine the Bayesian information criterion to assess the impact of ethnicity on the probability of whistle-blowing.

The findings support the notion that organisational “outsiders” tend to report perceived wrongdoing less than those who feel assured of their cultural or organisational status. The authors further find support for the notion that membership of small organisational groupings, primarily measured by organisational size, also tends to reduce the whistle-blowing likelihood. Opportunities for further research and potential policy and practical issues are discussed briefly in conclusion.

While confirming the predictors seen in many previous studies, the authors identify groups who report more or less than expected that have not been reported in previous research. These include employees from a non-English speaking background and various occupational and professional groups “at risk” of low reporting.

Corporate governance has as ancient a pedigree as the formation of companies. However, six contemporary developments have provided a focus which makes this the era par excellence of corporate governance. Under review are a representative set of the economies of the world. A start is made with the UK and the Cadbury Report, which in similar fashion to the development of British Quality Standard 5750 into ISO 9000, has now itself taken on world currency. The end piece of Cadbury‐related developments was the final Report of the Hampel Committee of January 1998. The USA spawned several reports which fed into the Cadbury initiative, notably the Treadway and COSO Reports, as well as the influence of the Securities and Exchange Commission. A consideration of Canada is followed by the European dimension and the study carried out by Ernst and Young. Finally South Africa, Australia and Japan are treated and conclusions drawn, including the collaborative partnership that may be formed between management accountants and internal auditors.

This study aims to address an acknowledged gap in the literature for the analysis of experienced practitioner views on the effects and implications of mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR).

Using an exploratory and sequential design, data was collected from South African regulatory policy documents, organisational comment letters and semi-structured interviews of practitioners. These findings informed a field survey, administered to auditors, investors, chief financial officers (CFOs) and audit committee members of Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) listed companies.

Practitioners expressed considerable pushback against the potential efficacy of MAFR to improve audit quality due to various “switching costs”, notably the loss of client-specific knowledge and expertise upon rotation. In addition, the cost and disruption to both the client and audit firm are considered significant and unnecessary, compared to audit partner rotation. The audit industry may suffer reduced profitability and increased strain on partners, leading to a decline in the appeal of the profession as a career of choice. This is likely to have negative implications for audit industry diversity objectives. Furthermore, the industry may become more supplier-concentrated amongst the Big 4 firms.

The findings have policy implications for regulators deciding whether to adopt the regulation, as well as guiding the design of policies and procedures to mitigate the negative effects of adoption.

The participants are experienced with diverse roles concerning the use, preparation and audit of financial statements of large exchange-listed multinational companies, as well as engagement in the auditor appointment process. The extant literature presents mixed results on the link between MAFR and audit quality, with most studies relying on archival and experimental designs. These have a limited ability to identify and critique the potential’s witching costs and unintended consequences of the regulation. Experienced participants responsible for decision-making within the audit, audit oversight and auditor appointment process, are best suited to provide perspective on these effects, contrasted against the audit regulator’s position.