RT Article
T1 Debating ethics or risks?: an exploratory study of audit partners’ peer consultations about ethics
JF Journal of business ethics
VO 175
IS 4
SP 741
OP 758
A1 Hazgui, Mouna
A1 Brivot, Marion ca. 20./21. Jh.
LA English
PB Springer Science + Business Media B. V
YR 2022
UL https://www.ixtheo.de/Record/1797390082
AB This qualitative field study is based on interviews with 20 experienced audit partners in France and documents the dialogical dimension of ethical deliberation in auditing. We ask: do audit partners consult each other when faced with an ethical dilemma at work? Who among their peers do they prefer to consult and why? Our analysis provides evidence that audit partners do not deliberate alone, contrary to what psychological experimental research on audit ethics usually postulates. When faced with an uncertain situation in terms of professional ethics, they seek reassurance by consulting colleagues. Not just any colleagues, however. Whom they consult depends on whether they wish to avoid or take measured ethical risks. Overall, we find that audit partners approach ethics as a personal and collective risk that must be managed in specific ways. This study enriches what we know about auditor ethics by helping to shed light on what is usually inaccessible to researchers: the questions that audit partners ask their peers when faced with uncomfortable ethical issues in client engagements before making a decision they find acceptable.
K1 Auditors’ ethical decision-making
K1 Collective reasoning
K1 Peer consultations
K1 Risk culture
K1 Aufsatz in Zeitschrift
DO 10.1007/s10551-020-04576-4