David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 47 (2):77 - 87 (2003)
The community has legislatively conferred on external auditors a special but lucrative responsibility to provide fair and independent opinions about management''s preparation of company financial statements. In return, auditors are obliged by professional standards to act with integrity, independently and in the public interest. This study examined 174 auditors'' predisposition to provide just and fair judgements, using Kohlberg''s theory of developmental moral reasoning, one of the most widely accepted theories in justice psychology. Respondents came from five international audit firms in Copenhagen. Results indicated that auditors with pre-conventional or low level of just reasoning or comprised 64 respondents, the largest group in the sample. The pre-conventional level suggests that people will act in their own self-interest and do the right only to avoid punishment. Pre-conventional auditors have the ability to "do deals", advantageous for business. When faced with an ethical crisis, however, auditors as this level will tend to focus on their own needs at the expense of others. The post-conventional or mid level of just reasoning comprised 59 auditors, second largest group in the sample. This level indicates that these auditors have the predisposition to act fairly on principal, particularly when faced with an ethical crisis. The conventional level or mid-just reasoning consisted of 51 auditors. People with a conventional level of just reasoning believe in law and order, the maintenance of the status quo, however they tend not to be critical of laws, nor authority even if those laws and authority are unjust or evil.
|Keywords||auditors' fair and independent opinion just reasoning Kohlberg's theory of moral development|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Waymond Rodgers, Andrés Guiral & José A. Gonzalo (2009). Different Pathways That Suggest Whether Auditors' Going Concern Opinions Are Ethically Based. Journal of Business Ethics 86 (3):347 - 361.
Judy Tsui & Carolyn Windsor (2001). Some Cross-Cultural Evidence on Ethical Reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics 31 (2):143 - 150.
Abdul Majid, Ferdinand A. Gul & Judy S. L. Tsui (2001). An Analysis of Hong Kong Auditors' Perceptions of the Importance of Selected Red Flag Factors in Risk Assessment. Journal of Business Ethics 32 (3):263 - 274.
Linda Thorne, Dawn W. Massey & Michel Magnan (2003). Institutional Context and Auditors' Moral Reasoning: A Canada-U.S. Comparison. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 43 (4):305 - 321.
William A. Kerler & Larry N. Killough (2009). The Effects of Satisfaction with a Client's Management During a Prior Audit Engagement, Trust, and Moral Reasoning on Auditors' Perceived Risk of Management Fraud. Journal of Business Ethics 85 (2):109-136.
Alan K. M. Au & Danny S. N. Wong (2000). The Impact of Guanxi on the Ethical Decision-Making Process of Auditors – an Exploratory Study on Chinese CPAs in Hong Kong. Journal of Business Ethics 28 (1):87 - 93.
Ferdinand A. Gul, Andy Y. Ng & Marian Yew Jen Wu Tong (2003). Chinese Auditors' Ethical Behavior in an Audit Conflict Situation. Journal of Business Ethics 42 (4):379 - 392.
Andrés Guiral-Contreras, Emiliano Ruiz-Barbadillo & Waymond Rodgers, To What Extend is the Going Concern Judgment Influenced by the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?
Theresa Libby & Linda Thorne (2004). The Identification and Categorization of Auditors' Virtues. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (3):479-498.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #118,316 of 1,005,517 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,743 of 1,005,517 )
How can I increase my downloads?