Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accounting Professionals’ Ethical Judgment and the Institutional Disciplinary Context: A French–US Comparison

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates whether accounting professionals’ ethical judgment (EJ) is influenced by the disciplinary system established by the accounting profession in France and the United States. Our study first attempts to determine whether there is a link between the EJ of accounting professionals and the disciplinary context, in each country. It then performs a comparative analysis of the two nations. Our findings indicate that the judgment of American accounting professionals is correlated with the disciplinary decisions of the accountancy board. By contrast, the judgment of French accounting professionals is independent of the disciplinary context. Whereas cross-national studies have thus far attributed differences among nations mainly to cultural distance, current research shows that non-cultural national factors should also be considered. In line with this perspective, our study suggests that institutional factors, in particular the disciplinary system, may also account for the differences between French and American accounting professionals’ ethical perceptions. We support these results by highlighting some characteristics of the countries’ respective legal systems (such as the ease of the procedure, the publication and the impact of sanctions and the format of the rules), which may explain the divergences observed. We conclude by identifying implications for the independence of accounting professionals’ EJ and the risks associated with dissuasive disciplinary systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This rate is based on an average of 23.3 cases per year for 18,278 members of the Ordre des experts-comptables in 2006.

  2. The rate is based on an average of 22.3 cases per year for 37,528 New York licensed CPAs in 2006.

  3. Obstruction of justice and false declarations, income tax-related misconduct, providing both audit and consultancy services, disagreement and misleading on fees, failure to comply with technical standards, failure to prepare tax returns, failure to cooperate in investigation of professional organizations.

  4. Providing both audit and consultancy services, depending on a major client, advertising, conflict on fees with peers, failure to transmit files to peers.

  5. In France: securities violations, income tax-related misconduct, disagreement and misleading on fees, negligence, failure to comply with technical standards, failure to comply with procedural and documentary standards, failure to meet CPE. In the US: Providing both audit and consultancy services, depending on a major client, failure to meet CPE, advertising, conflict on fees with peers, failure to transmit file to peers, disloyal competition.

  6. Examen d’Activité Professionnelle.

  7. Adopting a risk-based approach, the AICPA has been reducing the number of situations comprising this list, down to 39 as of December 2014 (Section 191—Ethics Rulings on Independence, Integrity, and Objectivity of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct).

References

  • Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labour. The University of Chicago Press.

  • Adams, B., Malone, F. L., & Woodrow, J. (1995). Confidentiality decisions: The reasoning process of CPAS in resolving ethical dilemmas. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 1015–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AICPA. (2009). 2009 TRENDS report on the supply and demand within the accounting profession.

  • Audy, S. (2003). Manquement à l’intégrité et détermination de la sanction: un art qui n’a rien d’une sinécure ?. CLERUM.

  • Baker, R. C., Bédard, J., & Prat dit Hauret, C. (2002). La réglementation de l’audit: Une comparaison entre le Canada, les États-Unis et la France. Comptabilité Contrôle Audit, May (pp. 139-168).

  • Baker, R. C., Bédard, J. & Prat Dit Hauret, C. (2005). A comparative analysis of regulation of statutory auditing in France, Canada and the United States. In European Accounting Association Congress.

  • Bampton, R., & Cowton, C. J. (2013). Taking stock of accounting ethics scholarship: A review of the journal literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 114, 549–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bédard, J. (2001). The disciplinary process of the accounting profession: Protecting the public or the profession? The Québec experience. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 20, 399–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bommer, M., Gratto, C., Gravander, J., & Tuttle, M. (1987). A behavioral model of ethical and unethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 6, 265–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaney, P. K., & Philipich, K. L. (2002). Shredded reputation: The cost of audit failure. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(4), 1221–1245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2014). Are workers more likely to be deviant than managers? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 123, 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christie, P. M. J., Kwon, I.-W. G., Stoeberl, P. A., & Baumhart, R. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of ethical attitudes of business managers: India, Korea and the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 263–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CNCC. (2008). Atouts du Commissariat aux Comptes, January.

  • Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (1995). An exploratory examination of international differences in auditors’ ethical perceptions. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 7(1), 37–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (1996). A methodological note on cross-cultural accounting ethics research. The International Journal of Accounting, 31(1), 55–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craft, J. L. (2013). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 2004–2011. Journal of Business Ethics, 117, 221–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CRCC Versailles. (2009). Rapport d’activité 2009.

  • David, R. (1982). Le droit comparé. Paris: Economica.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Iribarne, P. (1994). The honour principle in the ‘Bureaucratic Phenomenon’. Organization Studies, 15, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Iribarne, P. (2002). La légitimité de l’entreprise comme acteur éthique aux États-Unis et en France. Revue française de gestion, 140, 23–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubinsky, A. J., Nataraajan, R., & Huang, W. (2004). The influence of moral philosophy on retail salespeople’s ethical perceptions. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 38, 297–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, P., & Shome, A. (2009). Cultural crossvergence and social desirability bias: Ethical evaluations by chinese and canadian business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 527–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duperret, C., & Lemaignan, A. (1996). Chambres de discipline: compte rendu d’activité des années 93-94-95. SIC, 146, 39–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • DuPont, A. M., & Craig, J. S. (1996). Does management experience change the ethical perceptions of retail salespeople? A comparison of the ethical perceptions of current students with those of recent graduates. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 815–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekici, A., & Onsel, S. (2013). How ethical behavior of firms is influenced by the legal and political environments: A Bayesian causal map analysis based on stages of development. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 271–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eynon, G., Hill, N. Y., & Stevens, K. (1997). Factors that influence the moral reasoning abilities of accountants: Implications for universities and the profession. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1297–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, O., & Gresham, L. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of marketing, 49, 87–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, D. M., & Chow, C. M. (2010). An exploratory study of chinese accounting students’ and auditors’ audit-specific ethical reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 353–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaa, J. C. (1992). Discussion of a model of auditors’ ethical decision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 11, 60–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garmilis, G. & Stokes, L. (2010). Professional justice: A question of communication? Eye on the accounting profession. In EMEFIR (Vol. 5, no. 2).

  • Ge, L., & Thomas, S. (2008). A cross-cultural comparison of the deliberative reasoning of Canadian and Chinese accounting students. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 189–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazgui, M., Lesage, C., & Pochet, C. (2011). Independent audit oversight authorities: A comparative study of the United States and France. Denver, Colorado: American Accounting Association.

  • Honeycutt, E. D., Glassman, M., Zugelder, M. T., & Karande, K. (2001). Determinants of ethical behavior: A study of auto salespeople. Journal of Business Ethics, 32, 69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vasquez-Parraga, A. (1993). Organizational consequences, marketing ethics, and salesforce supervision. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 78–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vittel, S. J. (1986). A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6, 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, T. (2011). International management ethics: A critical, cross-cultural perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Karcher, J. N. (1996). Auditors’ ability to discern the presence of ethical problems. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1033–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), The handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korenman, S. G., Berk, R., Wenger, N. S., & Lew, V. L. (1998). Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity. Journal of the American Medical Association, 279(1), 41–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampe, J. C., & Finn, D. W. (1992). A model of auditors’ ethical decision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 11, 33–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemaignan, A. (1989). Déontologie de l’expert-comptable, Conseil Supérieur de l’Ordre des experts-comptables. Editions comptables Malesherbes, 2nd Ed.

  • Loe, T. W., Ferrell, L., & Mansfield, P. (2000). A review of empirical studies assessing ethical decision making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(3), 185–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, S. E. (1971). A survey of ethical behavior in the accounting profession. Journal of Accounting Research, 9(2), 287–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, S. E. (1972). Enforcement of the code of ethics: A survey. The Accounting Review, 47(1), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G. S., Resick, C. J., Keatingand, M. A., & Dickson, M. W. (2009). Ethical leadership across cultures: A comparative analysis of German and US perspectives. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(2), 127–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinov-Bennie, N., & Pflugrath, G. (2008). The strength of an accounting firm’s ethical environment and the quality of auditors’ judgments. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, G. (2000). Cross-cultural methodological issues in ethical research. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(2), 89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moriarity, S. (2000). Trends in ethical sanctions within the accounting profession. Accounting Horizons, 14(4), 427–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudrack, P. E., & Mason, S. E. (2013). Ethical judgments: What do we know, where do we go? Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 575–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolder, C., & Riley, T. C. (2014). Effects of differences in national culture on auditors’ judgments and decisions: A literature review of cross-cultural auditing studies from a judgment and decision making perspective. Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory, 33(2), 141–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Normandeau, A., & Akman, D. (1968). Towards the measurement of criminality in Canada. Acta Criminologica, 1, 135–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, B. (2002). U.S.-American and German business ethics: An intercultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 41, 195–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, L. D. (1994). Professional accounting body ethics. In search of the private interest. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19(6), 507–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesqueux, Y. (2000). Ethique et comptabilité. Encyclopédie de la comptabilité du contrôle et de l’audit. Economica (pp. 669–676).

  • Pincus, K. V. (2000). The role of rules in accounting: Do rules guide us to the right path or to the path of least resistance? Research on Accounting Ethics, 6, 243–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponemon, L. A. (1992). Ethical reasoning and selection-socialization in accounting. Accounting Organizations and Society, 17(3), 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponemon, L. A. (1993). Can ethics be taught in accounting? Journal of Accounting Education, 11, 185–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prat dit Hauret, C. (2003). L’indépendance de l’auditeur du commissaire aux comptes: une analyse empirique basée sur des composantes psychologiques du comportement. Comptabilité Contrôle Audit, 2(9), 31–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, A. M., Cooper, D. J., Scarbrough, D. P., & Chilton R. C. (1995). Changes in the code of ethics of the U.S. accountings profession, 1917 and 1988: The continual quest for legitimation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(6), 507–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1998). Some initial steps toward improving the measurement of ethical evaluations of marketing activities. Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 871–879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reidenbach, R. E., Robin, D. P., & Dawson, L. (1991). An application and extension of a multidimensional ethics scale to selected marketing practices and marketing groups. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19, 83–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaefer, J., & Welker, R. B. (1994). Distinguishing characteristics of certified public accountants disciplined for unprofessional behavior. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 13(2), 97–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellin, T., & Wolfgang, M. E. (1963). Constructing an index of delinquency. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Center of Criminologica Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaub, M. (1994). An analysis of the association of traditional demographic variables with the moral reasoning of auditing students and auditors. Journal of Accounting Education, 12(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., & Hume E. C. (2005). Linking culture and ethics: A comparison of accountants’ ethical belief systems in the individualism/collectivism and power distance contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, J. R., & Pan, Y. (2010). Ethical judgments in business ethics research: Definition, and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 405–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stead, W. E., Worrell, D. L., & Stead, J. G. (1990). An integrative model for understanding and managing ethical behavior in business organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strubler, D., Park, S.-H., Argawal, A., & Cayo, K. (2012). Development of a macro-model of cross-cultural ethics. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 15(2), 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianou, S. (2003). Measuring crime seriousness perceptions: What have we learned and what else do we want to know. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, 37–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, et al. (2010). Cross-cultural difference and accounting ethics: An empirical study for accounting students. International of Organizational Innovation, 2(3), 161–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, B., Arnold, D., & Pierce, B. (2010). The impact of perceived ethical culture of the firm and demographic variables on auditors’ ethical evaluation and intention to act decisions. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 531–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J. (2002). Culture, nation, and entrepreneurial strategic orientations: Implications for an emerging economy. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 26(4), 95–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J., & Chow, I. H.-S. (2009). Isolating cultural and national influence on value and ethics: A test of competing hypotheses. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 197–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. (2008). Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 547–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C. W., & Seaman, S. L. (1996). Ethics violations in the accounting profession: An empirical investigation. Research on Accounting Ethics, 2, 243–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorne, L., Massey, D. W., & Magnan, M. (2003). Institutional context and auditors’ moral reasoning: A Canada–U.S. comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 305–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Luijk, H. J. L. (1990). Recent developments in European business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 537–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (1992). The globalization of business ethics: Why America remains distinctive. California Management Review, 35(1), 30.

  • Warming-Rasmussen, B., & Windsor, C. A. (2003). Danish evidence of auditors’ level of moral reasoning and predisposition to provide fair judgments. Journal of Business Ethics, 47, 77–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerman, J. W., Beekun, R. I., Stedham, Y., & Yamamura, J. (2007). Peers versus national culture: An analysis of antecedents to ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(3), 239–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong-On-Wing, B., & Lui, G. (2013). Beyond cultural values: An implicit theory approach to cross-cultural research in accounting ethics. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 25(1), 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An introduction to comparative law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Télécom Ecole de Management, Institut Mines-Télécom, Évry, France

    Loréa Baïada-Hirèche & Ghislaine Garmilis

  2. PSL, Université Paris-Dauphine, DRM, Paris, France

    Loréa Baïada-Hirèche

Authors
  1. Loréa Baïada-Hirèche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ghislaine Garmilis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Loréa Baïada-Hirèche.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baïada-Hirèche, L., Garmilis, G. Accounting Professionals’ Ethical Judgment and the Institutional Disciplinary Context: A French–US Comparison. J Bus Ethics 139, 639–659 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2876-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2876-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation