Your manager requires that you, as cashier, immediately enter each sale. Recently, lunch hour traffic has increased and the assistant manager asks you to avoid delays be taking customers cash and making change without entering sales.

Description

Your manager requires that you, as cashier, immediately enter each sale. Recently, lunch hour traffic has increased and the assistant manager asks you to avoid delays be taking customers cash and making change without entering sales. The assistant manager says she will add up cash and enter sales after lunch. She says that, in this way, the register will always match the cash amount when the manager arrives at three o’clock. What do you do?After reading the required article “Reactions to ethical dilemmas: A study pertaining to certified public accountants” by Claypool, Fetyko, and Pearson, propose and evaluate two other courses of action you might consider and explain your reasons why.

1 attachmentsSlide 1 of 1attachment_1attachment_1.slider-slide > img { width: 100%; display: block; }
.slider-slide > img:focus { margin: auto; }

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Reactions to Ethical Dilemmas: A Study
Pertaining to Certified Public Accountants
ABSTRACT. This study discusses how perceptions of ethics
are formed by certified public accountants (CPAs). Theologians are used as a point of comparison. When considering
CPA ethical dilemmas, both subject groups in this research
project viewed ‘confidentiality’and ‘independence’ as more
important than ‘recipient of responsibility* and ‘seriousness
of breach*. Neither group, however, was insensitive to any of
the factors presented for its consideration. CPA reactions to
ethical dilemmas were governed primarily by provisions of
the CPA ethics code; conformity to that code may well be
evidence of higher stage moral reasonii^.
G. A. claypool
D. F. Fetyko
M. A. Pearson
Southern California. What made the conference
distinctive was its sponsorship and participants: It
was jointly sponsored by the schools of business and
religion; participants included CPAs and theologians.
The CPAs attending the conference were surprised
at how quickly the theologians understood the
nature of the CPA’s working environment and some
of the unique ethical problems with which the CPA
must deal.
The CPA code of ethics
One characteristic of a profession is its self-regulation by a code of ethics. Intuitively, one might expea
that professionals react to ethical dilemmas and
situations by seeking solutions in their respective
codes. But that does not necessarily have to be the
case. This article describes the results of a research
projea designed to discover the factors certified
public accountants (CPAs) feel are important when
they are confronted with ethical dilemmas.
For comparison purposes, theologians — a group
traditionally perceived as being concerned with
ethics — were studied along with CPAs in this
project. The impetus for including theologians in
this study was a report in The Wall Street Journal
(‘Goal: Ethical Standards’, 1984) that describes an
accountii^ ethics conference at the University of
As described more fully byBollom (1988), the CPA’s
principal purpose in American society is performing
the attest functioiL
An attest engagement is one in which a practitioner
[CPA] is engaged to issue or does issue a written communication that expresses a conclusion about the reliability
of a written assertion that is the responsibility of another
party (American Institute of CPAs, 1989a).
Probably the most well-known attest engagement
is the CPA’s auditing of financial statements prepared by a company’s management. In this situation
the CPA adds credibility to the financial statements
by issuing an independent auditor’s report stating
that the CPA believes the financial statements have
been ‘fairly presented’.
CPAs, as a group, have a primary responsibility to
Gregory A. Claypool is Associate Professor of Accounting and the public. As such, maintaining public trust and
Finance at Youngstown State University.
confidence has always been a critical concern of the
David F. Fetyko is Professor of Accounting at Kent State University. accounting profession.
Michael A. Pearson is Professor of Auounting at Kent State
University. He is the author of “Enhancing Perceptions of Auditor
Independence’, Journal of Business Ethics 4 (1985), 53—6,
and ‘Auditor Independence Deficiencies and Alleged Audit
Failures’, Journal of Business Ethics 6 (1987), 281-7.
Journal of Business Ethics 9:699—706,1990.
© 1990 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
. . . CPAs realize . . . services — whether offered in public
practice, indusay, government, or education — can only
be of value if users [the public] believe they can rely on
what [CPAs] do (Pearson, 1988).
700
G. A. Claypool et ai
To ensure CPAs understand their obligations, the
profession has developed an ethics code which
stresses that CPAs should “act in a way that will
serve the public interest, honor the public trust,
and demonstrate commitment to professionalism”
(American Institute of CPAs, 1989b). The code,
which is named the Code of Professional Conduct,
consists of broad principles (which provide a framework for ethical conduct) and several enforceable
rules. Particularly critical to this study are rules
pertaining to confidentiality and independence.
function] shall be independent in the performance of
professional services as required by standards promulgated by bodies designated by [American Institute
of CPAs] Council” (American Institute of CPAs
1989b).
Previous research
Much of the literature dealing with CPA perceptions
of ethical matters does not attempt to explain the
factors important in the development of those
perceptions. See, for example, work done by Lavin
Confidentiality
(1976), Shockley (1981), and Pearson and Ryans
(1982). A notable exception is a study completed
by Armstrong (1985), which is based on previous
Although CPAs do not possess the same legally
research conducted by Loeb (1971) and which
bound confidential relationship with their clients
provided
the framework for this current project
that doctors have with their patients and attorneys
have with their clients, the accounting profession
Loeb (1971) attempted to distinguish ethical CPAs
nevertheless recognizes the importance of confidenfrom unethical CPAs. Using two pretests, Loeb
tiality. It would be difficult — if not impossible — to
narrowed an original list of 50 ethical conflict sceobtain the needed cooperation, of client management
narios to 13 which discriminated effectively between
in an attest engj^ement if the managers do not have
ethical and unethical CPAs. He then presented CPA
confidence that CPAs will maintain a confidential
subjects with these scenarios and asked them to
relationship with them. The Code of Professional indicate whether the situations had been encounConduct, while allowing for situations such as retered by the subjects in their practices, the actions
sponding to a valid and enforceable subpoena or
the subjects took (or would have taken), and whether
summons, contains a rule that states, “A member in
the subjects approved of the actions taken by the
public practice [one who would perform tie attest
CPAs who were described in the scenarios.
function] shall not disclose any confidential client
Armstrong (1985), using CPAs and students as
information without the specific consent of the
subjects, applied a formal model to explain differclient” (American Institute of CPAs, 1989b).
ences in perceptions with respect to those Loeb
(1971) conflict scenarios that were violations of the
CPA ethics code in the early 1980s. Stage theory was
Independence
the structure for Armstrong’s work, with an objective test developed by Rest (1979b) used to deterIndependence from client management has long
mine the degree to which individuals use ‘principled
been considered the hallmark of CPAs who perform
reasoning’.
the attest function. ‘Independence’ is the CPA’s key
Briefly, stage theorists such as Kohlberg (1976)
ethical concept If the public does not believe CPAs
view the development of the individual’s moral
are independent of those whose work they are
judgment of ethical issues as progressing concurexamining, then the public is likely to question the
rently with the ability to think. The combination of
verity of CPA-prepared reports. “Users [of attest
cognitive development and social interaction causes
reports] can only have faith in [a CPA’s] representathe individual to mature through a series of invariant
tions when confidence exists that the [CPA] has
cognitive stages. These stages are characterized by
acted as an impartial judge, basing conclusions on
progression from total focus on self (lower stages)
objective evidence” (Pearson, 1985). The first rule in
through considerations of the group (middle stages)
the Code ofProfessional Conduct states, “A member in to a focus on the inner self and the principles of
public practice [one who would perform the attest
human welfare and justice (higher stages).
Reactions to Ethical Dilemmas
Procedures used in this study
As part of a larger project, the data for analysis in
this study were collected using a questionnaire that
was mailed to CPAs and theologians who were
working primarily in the northeast Ohio (U.SA)
area. Judgment samples of 100 CPA-volunteers and
100 theologian-volunteers (from various religious
groups) were obtained through letters and phone
calls. The response rates were 63 percent and 68
percent, respectively, although all 200 volunteers had
agreed to participate when contacted prior to maiUng
the survey materials.
Ethical dilemmas
The survey included six CPA ethics dilemmas for
respondents to contemplate. Four of the dilemmas
were adapted from Armstroi^’s (1985) study, and
two were created specifically for this project The
dilemmas are listed in Table I. Three of the six
(numbers 1, 3, and 5 in Table I) deal with confidentiality, and three pertain to the concept of CPA
independence (numbers 2,4, and 6 in Table I).
The six dilemmas contain enough diversity with
respect to the CPA’s responsibility in society to allow
TABLE I
CPA ethics dilemmas
Dilemma #
1
2
3
CPA Z is approached by a prospective client
employed by an existing client corporation.
The employee discloses that key personnel
of the client organization are planning to
form their own corporation in competition
with their employer. CPA Z wonders if he
should reveal the scheme to his client.
CPA Z’s sister, Susan, is the treasurer and a
26% stockholder of ABC Corporation. The
president of ABC Corporation asked Z if he
would perform the annual audit of ABC
Corporation. CPA Z wonders if he should
accept the audit engagement.
CPA Z serves as the auditor for Widget &
Co. Widget’s market share has declined
drastically, and Z knows that Widget will
701
TABLE I
Dilemma #
soon be bankrupt. Another of Z’s audit
clients is Solid Company. While auditing
Solid’s accounts receivable, Z notes that
Widget & Co. owes Solid $200 000. CPA Z
wonders if he should wam his client. Solid
Company, about Widget’s impending
bankruptcy.
CPA Z is the senior partner of the
accounting firm X, Y, & Z, CPAs. Z
oversees the independent audit of one of the
firm’s clients, Rockhard Savings & Loan.
The president of Rockhard privately told Z
that a block of funds had been set aside for
qualified new employees of the CPA firm.
This block offiindswas available to the new
employees at the interest rate chained to
other Rockhard borrowers. Rockhard’s
president is well aware that Z’s CPA firm
experiences some difficulty hiring good
people in the mid-size but growing
community and is willing to do what he can
to help while mortgage money is so tight
Several new assistant accountants for X, Y,
& Z have already obtained home loans
under this arrangement. CPA Z wonders if
his firm should continue serving as
Rockhard’s auditor.
CPA Z is considering a merger with CPAJ.
To facilitate the negotiations,/ requests
access to Z’s files of client work papers,
income tax returns, and correspondence. Z’s
clients are unaware of the proposed merger,
and CPA Z wonders if he should grant _/
access to the files.
CPA Z, in addition to practicing public
accounting, is heavily involved in
community activities. He is especially well
known for his passionate promotion of
higher voter participation in elections.
High-Voter Company, a newly formed
company, has developed a revolutionary
promotional process that the company’s
officers claim will greatly increase voter
turnout The president of High-Voter asked
Z if he would perform the initial audit of
High-Voter. CPA Z wonders if he should
accept the audit engagement
702
G. A. Claypool et al.
respondents to perceive a difference among the
dilemmas on that basis rather than on specific
categories in the CPA code of ethics. Dilemma
number 1 deals with confidentiality, the CPA’s
concern involves his responsibility to his client
Dilemma number 2 is an independence issue; the
CPA’s dilemma relates to his responsibility to the
public. Dilemma number 3, a scenario dealing with
confidentiality, involves potentially conflicting responsibilities to two clients. Dilemma number 4 is
independence-oriented; the CPA’s dilemma concerns
his responsibility to the public and also to other
CPAs (because the described arrangement may be
viewed as giving one firm an unfair advantage to
grow and prosper in relation to other CPA firms in
the area).
Dilemma number 5 is the last of three confidentiality scenarios. The CPA has a responsibility to his
current clients that might confiict with his responsibility to his prospective partner. Finally, dilemma
number 6, the concluding independence case, deals
with the CPA’s responsibility to the pubUc.
Factors used whenfaced with dilemmas
Respondents were not requested to ‘solve’ the six
dilemmas but instead were asked to note the importance of six characteristics or factors when they
contemplated each of the six dilemmas. Five of the
factors corresponded to interpretations Armstrong
(1985) used in her work, and one factor was unique
to this study. The six factors are ‘confidentiality’,
‘recipient of benefit’, ‘independence’, ‘seriousness of
breach’, ‘recipient of responsibility’, and ‘growth of
firm’. The six factors were briefiy described in the
questionnaire and are noted in Table II exactly as
they appeared.
Respondents indicated their perceived degree of
importance of each listed factor for all six dilemmas
by circling the appropriate number on a five-point
scale where ‘ 1 ‘ was ‘very unimportant’ and ‘5’ was
‘very important’. Additionally, space was provided to
list and rate the importance of any factor the
respondent felt should be added to the six listed.
Stage theorists, including Kohlberg (1976) and
Rest (1979a), assert that mere conformity to a moral/
ethics code is insufficient evidence as to an individual’s moral/ethical maturity. Mature individuals
TABLE II
Factors used when contemplating dilemmas
Fartor #
1
2
3
4
5
6
Confidentiality — whether CPA Z should
determine his course of action based on the
notion of privileged communication between
CPA and client.
Recipient of benefit — whether CPA Z or the
client would benefit from the contemplated
action.
Independence — whether CPA Z can maintain
an attitude of unbiased objectivity.
Seriousness of breach — whether the degree of
deviation from a code of ethics would be a
serious violation or only a minor violation.
Recipient of responsibility — whether CPA Z
has a duty or responsibility to various interest
groups other than to the client
Growth of firm — whether CPA Z will be able
to retain and acquire more clients if the
contemplated action is taken.
in this view are those who internalize the spirit and
intent of a code. These individuals would subordinate the provisions or rules of a code to the purpose
of the code if they perceived a code shortcoming
with respect to a particular dilemma. Armstrong
(1985) interpreted her results in this manner, asserting diat morally/ethically mature CPAs use the
concepts ‘recipient of responsibility’ and ‘seriousness
of breach’ radier than specific conduct code provisions when viewing ethical dilemmas.
The objective in this current study was to explore
some of the factors CPAs consider when faced with
situations having ethical implications. Do CPAs react
to ethical situations by mere conformance to the
rules in their code of ethics, or do they go beyond
the specific rules and react on a higher ethical plane?
The factors listed in our questionnaire contained
some that were code-oriented and some that were
considered by Armstrong (1985) as ‘higher plane’.
And, by providing space for respondents to add
factors to the list of six, additional data could be
obtained to help determine if CPAs go beyond mere
code conformity.
Theologians were included as subjects in this
study to provide a point of comparison. They were
Reactions to Ethical Dilemmas
expected to know less about the attest fiinction and
the CPA code of ethics than the CPAs, but they were
expected to be well versed in ethical matters. Additionally, theologians were expected to view ‘confidentiality’ as the ‘key’ ethical concept, as opposed
to the CPAs’ principal focus on ‘independence’.
Finally, it was hoped that a more detached point of
view might lead to ethical issues and factors which
had not been recognized and, hence, not considered
in the research design. As Ohmae (1984) noted, “The
more direcdy one is involved . . . , the easier it
becomes to overlook the commonsense issues that
are there to be raised.”
Hence, determining whether theologians would
react to the CPA ethical dilemmas in the same
manner as the CPAs was one aim of this study.
Would the theologians rate the six noted factors
differently than the CPAs? Would the theologians
offer additional factors to add to the list of six? These
were questions the research instrument was designed
to answer.
TABLE III
Mean responses for the six factors
Factor
Dilemma #
CPAs
Theologians
Independence
•1
2
•3
4
*5
6
1
•2
3
4
5
6
1
•2
•3
•4
5
6
•1
2
3
4
•5
6
1
2
3
4
•5
6
1
•2
3
4
5
6
2.63
4.84
2.90
4.32
1.81
3.81
3.30
2.43
3.08
3.17
3.14
3.23
4.33
1.97
4.75
1.75
4.41
1.92
3.27
3.76
3.65
3.30
3.13
2.84
3.17
3.24
3.16
3.13
2.67
3.55
2.43
2.05
2.37
2.40
3.35
2.95
3.23
4.71
3.59
4.18
2.80
3.95
3.12
3.23
3.53
3.38
3.09
3.26
4.56
2.61
4.45
2.41
4.35
2.15
3.92
3.58
3.95
3.17
3.91
2.94
3.57
3.11
3.61
3.40
3.71
3.31
2.83
2.54
2.85
2.65
3.28
2.66
Recipient of benefit
Confidentiality
Seriousness of breach
Research results
Sixty-three CPAs and 68 theologians responded to
the questionnaire, and many provided factors in
addition to the six Usted in the research instrument
Table III lists the CPAs’ and theologians’ mean
responses for each of the six faaors associated with
each of the six ethical dilemmas. Some of the additional factors offered by the respondents appear in
Table V.
Table III reveals that theologians generally rated
the importance of the six factors more highly than
the CPAs. Of the 36 means (six dilemmas times six
factors) for each group, the mean responses of
theologians were greater than the CPAs’ mean
responses in 24 instances.
As shown in Table III, dilemma number 2 provoked the strongest reaction among CPAs regarding
‘independence’. This same dilemma also received the
highest rating among CPAs for ‘seriousness of
breach’. Theologians also rated the importance of
‘independence’ higher for dilemma number 2 than
for any other dilemma. Theologians, however, rated
the importance of ‘seriousness of breach’ higher for
the three dilemmas involving ‘confidentiality’ (numbers 1, 3, and 5) than those involving ‘independence’
703
Recipient of
responsibility
Growth of firm
* – Statistically significant difference at the 0.05 level.
(numbers 2, 4, and 6). Thus, each professional group
perceived a violation of its own ‘key’ ethical concept
to be more serious than a violation of some other
concept
The results reflect the CPAs’ training in the
provisions of their ethics code as opposed to the
more general, less code-specific approach of the
G. A. Claypool etal.
704
theologians. Because of their education iti the code
of ethics, CPAs were able to identify more clearly
the dominant ethical code provision in each dilemma.
When a particular factor was not dominant, CPAs
rated the importance for the factor relatively low.
Thus, the range of mean responses for CPAs was
greater than for theologians for all but one case.
The more general, less code-specific approach
used by the theologians is also apparent when
reviewing the list of additional factors suggested by
each group. Table IV reveals that 26 theologians and
12 CPAs suggested one or more additiotial factors.
Table V shows theologians more frequently identified factors of a more basic ethical nature than the
specific provisions typically found in a code of ethics.
Trust*, ‘self-esteem’, ‘morally right or wrong’, ‘relationship to Jesus Christ*, ‘personal value system*, and
‘honesty’ were offered as factors by theologians. Only
one CPA referred to *a high personal code of moral
conduct’, and none made reference to God.
A second point of interest regarding additional
factors offered by the theologians, however, is their
identification of components of the CPA’s code of
ethics: Some theologians suggested ‘integrity* and
‘objectivity’ as factors, and both can be found as
important components of the CPA ethics code.
Additionally one theologian noted the factor ‘appearance of wrong-doing’, which is near to the CPA code
concept of ‘appearance of independence*.
It is apparent from the additional factors offered
that theologians perceived much more potential for
a ‘conflict of interest* in the dilemmas than did the
CPAs. This could simply be a reflection of the lack
of knowledge about the CPA code of ethics. However, it could also be an indication that CPAs are not
TABLE IV
Number of factors suggested by respondents
Number of factors suggested
1
2
3
4 or more
Number of respondents
suggesting factors
CPAs
Theologians
8
3
0
7
1
7
12
26
9
3
TABLE V
Some factors suggested by respondents
Factors suggested by CPAs
Number of citations
Professionalism
Appearance of independence
Expectations of client
Expectations of society
Full disclosure offinancialdata
High personal code of moral conduct
Integrity
Legality
Personal greed and ego
Reliance on ethical charaaer of
professional associate
2
Factors suggested by theologians
Number of citations
Conflict of interest
Integrity
Trust
Loyalty
Self-esteem
Legality
Morally right or wrong
Reputation of firm
Objectivity
Personal value system
Relatiohship with Jesus Christ
Appearance of wrong-doing
Conformity with a code of ethics
Honesty
7
6
6
5
5
4
4
4
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Note: Not all respondent-suggested factors are shown above.
Some factors are omitted because the wording used by the
respondents makes the intended meaning unclear.
sensitive enough to the appearance pf a conflict of
interest.
Finally, the results of this study indicate that both
groups primarily view ethical scenarios through
their understanding of the provisions of their own
standards or codes of ethics. More specifically, at no
time were the suggested factors ‘recipient of benefit*,
‘seriousness of breach’, or ‘recipient of responsibility’
rated of highest importance for any of the dilemmas.
While both groups recognized these factors, they did
not override the CPA ethics code provisions ‘independence’ and ‘confidentiality* in importance. The
Reactions to Ethical Dilemmas
results of this current study, then, are inconsistent
with the findings of Armstrong (1985).
Sutmnary and conclusions
The objective in this study was to shed further light
on how perceptions of ethics are formed by CPAs.
Theologians were used as a point of comparison.
Both groups indicated that the concepts of ‘confidentiality’ and ‘independence’ are more important
than the concepts of ‘seriousness of breadi’ and
‘recipient of responsibility’ when viewing ethical
dilemmas. The implication is that both groups do
not subordinate the basic CPA ethics code provisions
of ‘independence’ and ‘confidentiality’ to considerations of the relative seriousness of a code breach or
to whom responsibility is owed.
Although both CPAs and theologians primarily
perceived CPA ethical situations via ‘confidentiality’
and ‘independence’ concepts, both groups recognized other attributes as having some impact on
these situations. Neither group was insensitive to the
concepts ‘recipient of responsibility’ or ‘seriousness
of breach’ or any other suggested concept. Instead,
both groups appeared to have carefully considered
the underlying purposes of the code provisions
‘independence’ and ‘confidentiality’ and determined
that conformity to these concepts was the best way
for CPAs to fulfill their responsibility to various
constituencies.
Stated within the context of stage theory, if a
focus upon ‘independence’ and ‘confidentiality’ is the
best way for CPAs to fulfill their responsibility to
various parties, then these concepts are not examples
of middle-stage moral development — as asserted by
Armstrong (1985) — but are instead examples of
higher stage reasoning. Further evidence that this
may be the case is found by examining additional
factors (not included in the original list of six)
suggested by respondents fi’om bodi groups. Factors
such as ‘self-esteem’, ‘morally right or wrong’,
‘integrity’, ‘professionalism’, and ‘expectations of
society* dearly focus on the inner self and the principles of human welfare and justice, which are the
key characteristics for higher stage moral reasoning
in stage theory.
Differences in the responses of CPAs and theologians were noted in two areas. First, an examination
705
of Table III reveals that theologians generally rated
the importance of the six suggested attributes for
each dilemma higher than did the CPAs. Of the 36
ratings for each group, the importance for theologians was higher 24 times. A second difference was
noted regarding respondent-suggested factors. Theologians identified factors of a more basic ethical
nature than the ones described by the CPAs. This
could imply that the education of CPAs does not
enhance their overall ethical development to the
same extent as the education provided theologians.
Perhaps, CPAs can benefit from knowing the factors
the theologians noted as important For example, the
most fi-equently cited factor by theologians was
‘conflict of interest’. None of the CPAs identified
this concept as important
It is possible that the dilemmas in this study were
too narrow with respect to the list of factors provided in the research instrument Therefore, the
results of this study may be limited to the types of
ethical dilemmas provided. Additionally, the study
results cannot be generalized to the population of
CPAs and theologians. The samples were small, and
because not everyone who initially agreed to participate fulfilled their commitment, some nonresponse bias could be present Nevertheless, it seems
clear that the CPA reactions to ethical dilemmas
were governed primarily by provisions of the CPA
code of ethics and that conformity to that code may
well be evidence of higher stage moral reasoning.
Acknowledgment
The helpfiil comments of Professors Richard E
Brown, Nealia Sue Bruning, Robert F. Krampf, and
Beth Wildman, all of Kent State University, are
gratefiilly acknowledged.
References
American Institute of CPAs: 1989a, AICPA Professional
Standards Volume 1: US. Auditing Standards (Commerce
Clearing House, Inc. for the AICPA, Chicago).
American Institute of CPAs: 1989b, AICPA Professional
Standards Volume 2: Aaounting and Review Services, Code of
Professional Conduct, Bylaws, International Accountings International Auditing, Management Advisory Services, Quality
706
G. A. Claypool et al.
Control, Quality Review, Tax Practice (Commerce Clearing
House, Inc., for the AICPA, Chicago).
Armstrong, M.: 1985, ‘Intemalization of the Professional
Ethic by Certified Public Accountants: A Multidimensional Scaling Approach’, Doctoral dissertation. University of Southern California.
BoUom, W.: 1988, ‘Ethics and Self-Regulation for CPAs in
die J.SA.Journal ofBusiness Ethics!, 55—61.
‘Goal: Ethical Standards for Accounting Practices’: 1984, The
Wall StreetJournal 24 May, 32.
Kohlberg, L: 1976, ‘Moral Stages and Moralization: The
Cognitive-Developmental Approach’, in Likona, T. (ed.).
Moral- Development and Behavior (Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston, New York) 31-53.
Lavin, D.: 1976, ‘Perceptions of Independence of the
Auditor’, The Accounting Review 51,41 —50.
Leob, S.; 1971, ‘A Survey of Ethical Behavior in the Accounting ?To£ession’, Journal ofAuountingResearch9, 287—306.
Ohmae, K.: 1984, The Mind of the Strategist (Penguin Books,
New York).
Pearson, M.: 1985, ‘Enhancing Perceptions of Auditor
Independence’,yo«
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.