Tag Archives: ethics

Ethics – Fundamental Attribution Error

When we read the stories about Enron, HealthSouth, and other accounting scandals, what is usually mentioned is the malicious intent of the executives to perpetrate a fraud. This is because “bad people do bad things,” right? Although the stories are instructive of how things can go wrong in an organization and how it can affect those involved, it is easy to forget about how we are all susceptible to the same temptations.

The fundamental attribution error is the human tendency to attribute the cause of these wrongdoings to the character of the individual who committed them. It’s called an error because, overwhelmingly, human behavior is determined more by environment than inherent personality traits. This error of perception works both ways, too: when something goes right, we tend to think that it was due to our virtues and/or skills rather than external factors (sheer luck, a good supporting staff who helped along the way, or a stock-market generally on an uptick). This, combined with the fact that people tend to rate their ethical inclinations higher than they actually are, is a troublesome sign for working professionals in just about every field. A fraud can begin with an innocent mistake, and continue because the perpetrator needs to cover it up. Of course, this is because they do not believe themselves to be a bad person.

However, being aware of the problem is an important step toward preventing future unethical behavior. That accountants spend a great deal of time thinking about internal control perhaps serves as a tribute to this way of thinking. We restrict access and separate duties of employees in a manner that reflects the notion that environmental factors are strong determinants of behavior. Surely these companies do not go around hiring bad people all the time so that they feel the need to exercise constant vigilance. These employees go along with it without feeling as though they are distrusted because the company thinks they are bad people and thus likely to steal from them. It is an unfortunate fact of life, but you can put an otherwise good person in a position where they can commit fraud without oversight or control, and you will run the risk of a fraud occurring.Thumbnail_FundamentalAttributionError_01_21_14_Version_01-1024x576

For more about the psychological aspects of ethics, see Ethical Decision Making: More Needed Than Good Intentions and the Ethics Unwrapped Series, both by Robert Prentice, McCombs School of Business.

The Lance Armstrong Scandal from an Accounting Perspective

The US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) announced on Friday that it would be stripping Lance Armstrong’s 7 Tour de France titles from him, as well as permanently banning him from competitive cycling. I think this scandal is important to talk about in that it relates to our role as accountants.

You might be reading this thinking, “Does this scandal even relate to accounting?” The answer is yes, it absolutely does. The scandal in this issue is in part the results of the investigation, but mostly in how the investigation was conducted. The USADA used a number of procedures that were at best questionable and at most inherently illegal. We as accountants can learn from this scandal due to the fact that our role in society is very similar to that of the USADA. The USADA monitors US racers to ensure that bike races are fair and perfectly competitive. Auditors monitor organizations to ensure that the competition for-profits and shareholders are also fair and perfectly competitive. The difference between auditors and the USADA is what society expects of us and how we are socially reprimanded for unfair or unethical procedures.

This last statement may be a little strong, but let me frame it how I am seeing it. Armstrong was a retired cyclist when the case was brought against him. Any of the rulings wouldn’t make current cycling races fairer for riders. The USADA also brought charges against Armstrong that are over 17 years old, even though the organization has an 8 year limitation on these types of matters. The USADA seems to be changing its rules to get the results and publicity it wants while it preaches that everyone should be held to the same rules. According to U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks who oversaw the case against Armstrong, “USADA’s conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives, such as politics or publicity.”

Now let’s pretend that instead of a cycling investigation, this was a public company’s audit. If something this negative was said by a U.S. District Judge in relation to how an audit procedure was conducted, the public would be outraged. There would be lawsuits and huge damages to be paid.  The accounting firm’s reputation may even be permanently tarnished. But because the USADA doesn’t affect the majority of people directly, most don’t care enough to hold the “watchdog” accountable for unethical actions.

As accountants, what we can learn from this scandal is that the most important thing is to be fair and objective. It is essential to follow proper and standard procedures and to not cater to things like publicity and politics. We are watchdogs, not bullies. We need to make sure that every action we take and every decision we make is done to ensure business is a fair game to be won, and companies that exceed our expectations are not punished for playing by the rules.

Spreading Light

I’m sure I’m not the only one who has been shocked and dismayed at the news reports of our military’s horrific treatment of Afghans. The recent outbreak of these stories on top of an onslaught of reports regarding the poor treatment of US citizens at the hands of fellow Americans causes me to ask the question, “Is America becoming heartless?”

The Economic Collapse Blog certainly thinks so. The article, “19 Signs that America is Becoming a Heartless Place,” argues that as America has fallen on tough times with the down-trending economy and seemingly endless wars in which we are engaged, Americans have become more cynical and heartless. It then backs this claim with 19 recent American news stories.

The business world especially faces claims of being “heartless.” There are numerous frauds, Ponzi schemes, and immoral decisions led by business professionals that have led to the public perceiving business as “heartless.”

The thought that our country and the business world have become heartless makes me very concerned for the future. Obviously, my peers and I only have so much control in changing the future of our country. Yet, I do have faith in our ability to turn the tide and make the business world a more caring and considerate place.

I say this because McCombs instills the importance of ethical decision making. We value the needs of company stakeholders and community participants. Continue reading Spreading Light

SOPA: what it means to this MPA blogger

Google's response to SOPA

If you’ve visited Wikipedia, Google, or various other websites yesterday, you probably noticed their blackout/anti-SOPA messages and warnings. Before I go any further, let me just say that this blog entry is an attempt to explain SOPA in the most colloquial way that I can. I realize that there may be some missing pieces in my explanation.

SOPA stands for the Stop Online Piracy Act, which, on the surface seems to be a worthy cause. In theory, this act attacks something that is actually a real problem, internet piracy. The word piracy has a negative connotation and thusly initial public response would be that it is harmful. Haven’t we always been taught that plagiarism is wrong? Sure, the surface goal of SOPA is to stop foreign sites from providing users with pirated material and that is something the general population should at least try to support. And why companies such as Time Warner ARE supporting the bill. But, the repercussions of the bill would be far worse than just having to wait an extra week for the episode of your favorite show to be up on Hulu.

SOPA would have the biggest effect on any sites that use user-generated content. This may be why Wikipedia is so enthralled in the anti-SOPA movement. Other sites include Tumblr, Twitter and YouTube. Of course, this bill will not criminalize posting YouTube videos, per say, but it will hold YouTube to a new level of accountability and make it far more difficult to share and watch videos online. SOPA gives the Attorney General the ability to act against infringing websites without a trial or a court hearing and with that comes the ability to take advantage of this power. This would potentially cause more harm than the good that comes from intellectual property protection. Of course, SOPA would not go to the depths of some internet censorship such as that in China, however in practicality, it will have similar repercussions.

There have been attempts to stop piracy in the past- for example there are bills that have already passed that do exactly what SOPA is claiming to do and so, some believe that SOPA is unnecessary.

Of course, I am not supporting plagiarism or internet piracy. I go to a University with very high ethics and I plan to always stand by the honor code. However, I believe SOPA would do more harm than good and I hope that everyone takes a minute or two to get educated about the bill.

If this at all resonates with you, then please, do some research and find out how you can make a difference. Google has a few things to say about the bill and check out this full page ad that ran in the NYTimes a few months ago.

Please keep in mind that these are my own personal views, and may or may not reflect the opinion of McCombs or the University.

“Okay, employers don’t REALLY look at my Facebook, right?”

WRONG!

YOU control your online persona

For me, Facebook has always been a positive thing- barring it’s impeccable ability to distract during finals week. Facebook is an efficient way to keep up with old friends and family, and to stay in touch with friends around the world. It is often entertaining, and merely a way for everyone to share their life with each other. However, Facebook is not all fun and games.

Facebook holds us all to a new level of accountability. There are countless stories of employees who have misled their employers. And now, in a world governed by social media, employees’ indiscretions are being discovered via Facebook. Take, for example, the story of Kevin Colvin, a NYC bank employee who asked off for a family emergency that just so coincidently landed on Halloween weekend. When pictures surfaced of Colvin in costume celebrating the holiday, he was promptly discovered. Many other employees have chosen Facebook as their channel of communication with which to rant about their employer, and thus are discovered as well.

While recruiting –and even when you secure a job– it is important to remember that your Facebook is NOT completely separate from your work life. Any online representation of you is free to the public. Anything that you post online should match the reputation that you are trying to withhold.

What it all boils down to, is that if you question whether or not something should be posted online, the answer is probably that it shouldn’t.  Be smart about what you post because you aren’t just sharing it with your friends, you are sharing it with the internet- aka anyone who inquires.

Sidenote: If you read through this and thought, “Oh, this is ridiculous. Obviously this girl doesn’t understand that Facebook has privacy settings.” Although a valid point, Facebook updates often reset your settings back to “default” (not private!) and anyway, it is better to be safe than sorry.