The article says that in the earlier decades, companies used to have corporate ethics programs to convince that they were socially responsible and it also helped guide human behavior. But in 2014, the companies are willing to do the right thing and follow legal requirements. The study was carried out to determine the findings and observations regarding compliance of ethics and auditing requirements. Ethics training is available in 98% of organizations in the US, there is also seen an increase in hotlines to complain about ethical questions. There have been additions in the ethics program. One is the ethics based performance appraisal and another one is ethics based risk assessment. Both these programs are of a great help for maintenance of ethics.
According to the study, the auditors predict that a code of behavior cannot improve the principles and ethics required to be followed by managers, nor does the code increase consumer confidence. What really brings a change is making the managers sign a document that they will follow the code of ethics as well as motivating them enough to strictly adhere to the code. Ethical decision making is also different for internal and external auditors. Depending on the organization they work for and the work environment in which they work, the ethics followed by both may differ. The study shows that the auditors decisions are affected by the situations. The solution to this is in the training which different auditors receive. They should be trained in an appropriate manner and should be convinced to follow the ethics so as to make the right decision in whatever situation they may be. The effects of social consensus differs among different group of auditors. But the effect of social consensus is stringer in big firms as compared to internal auditors appointed in small firms. Transparency and sustainability are two main factors when it comes to ethical reporting.
Bibliography
Bolt-lee, C. E. (2014, June). Highlights if ethics research. Retrieved from Journal of Accountancy: http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2014/Jun/20139009.htm
