IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bbz/fcpbbr/v11y2014i5p24-48.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the Occasion Justify the Denunciation?: a Multilevel Approach for Brazilian Accountants

Author

Listed:
  • Bernardo de Abreu Guelber Fajardo

    (Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas da Fundação Getúlio Vargas)

  • Ricardo Lopes Cardoso

    (Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas da Fundação Getúlio Vargas)

Abstract

Frauds represent large losses to the global economy, and one of the main means for their containment is by means of denunciations within organizations: whistle blowing. This research aims to analyze whistle blowing within the Brazilian context, considering the influence of costs and intrinsic benefits as well as aspects of the individual's interaction with his/her organization, profession and society at large. By means of a questionnaire answered by 124 accountants, a multilevel model was applied to analyze these aspects. The results demonstrate the importance of situational aspects as a positive influence in favor of denunciations. These results are useful for organizations and regulatory institutions in developing institutional mechanisms to encourage denunciation. Moreover, the results are also useful for teachers of professional ethics and members of the Federal and Regional Accounting Councils, which are dedicated to the assessment of alleged deviations from the professional code of ethics.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernardo de Abreu Guelber Fajardo & Ricardo Lopes Cardoso, 2014. "Does the Occasion Justify the Denunciation?: a Multilevel Approach for Brazilian Accountants," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 11(5), pages 24-48, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bbz:fcpbbr:v:11:y:2014:i:5:p:24-48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://bbronline.com.br/index.php/bbr/article/download/193/292
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    2. Jeffrey, Cynthia & Weatherholt, Nancy & Lo, Steven, 1996. "Ethical development, professional commitment and rule observance attitudes: A study of auditors in Taiwan," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 365-379.
    3. Nhung Nguyen & M. Basuray & William Smith & Donald Kopka & Donald McCulloh, 2008. "Moral Issues and Gender Differences in Ethical Judgment using Reidenbach and Robin’s (1990) Multidimensional Ethics Scale: Implications in Teaching of Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(4), pages 417-430, February.
    4. Tony Simons, 2002. "Behavioral Integrity: The Perceived Alignment Between Managers' Words and Deeds as a Research Focus," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 18-35, February.
    5. Shani Robinson & Jesse Robertson & Mary Curtis, 2012. "The Effects of Contextual and Wrongdoing Attributes on Organizational Employees’ Whistleblowing Intentions Following Fraud," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(2), pages 213-227, March.
    6. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    7. Marcia P. Miceli & Janet P. Near & Charles R. Schwenk, 1991. "Who Blows the Whistle and Why?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 45(1), pages 113-130, October.
    8. Edit LUKACS & Nicoleta CRISTACHE & Maria NICOLAI & Michael STOICA, 2012. "Corporate Loyalty Versus Whistleblowing – An Ethical Challenge In Hrm," Business&Leadership, Scientific Society of Management from Romania, vol. 1(9), pages 55-66, January.
    9. Craig Smith, N. & Simpson, Sally S. & Huang, Chun-Yao, 2007. "Why Managers Fail to do the Right Thing: An Empirical Study of Unethical and Illegal Conduct," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 633-667, October.
    10. Aranya, N. & Pollock, J. & Amernic, J., 1981. "An examination of professional commitment in public accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 271-280, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jingyu Gao & Robert Greenberg & Bernard Wong-On-Wing, 2015. "Whistleblowing Intentions of Lower-Level Employees: The Effect of Reporting Channel, Bystanders, and Wrongdoer Power Status," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 85-99, January.
    2. Long, Chris P., 2018. "To control and build trust: How managers use organizational controls and trust-building activities to motivate subordinate cooperation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 69-91.
    3. Lee, Gladys & Xiao, Xinning, 2018. "Whistleblowing on accounting-related misconduct: A synthesis of the literature," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 22-46.
    4. Barrainkua, Itsaso & Espinosa-Pike, Marcela, 2018. "The influence of auditors’ professionalism on ethical judgement: Differences among practitioners and postgraduate students," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 176-187.
    5. P. Cassematis & R. Wortley, 2013. "Prediction of Whistleblowing or Non-reporting Observation: The Role of Personal and Situational Factors," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 615-634, October.
    6. Peter Mudrack & E. Mason, 2013. "Ethical Judgments: What Do We Know, Where Do We Go?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 575-597, July.
    7. Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey, 2009. "Bridging the gap between laboratory experiments and naturally occurring markets: An inferred valuation method," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 236-250, September.
    8. Yves Gendron & Roy Suddaby & Sandy Q. Qu, 2009. "Professional–Organisational Commitment: A Study of Canadian Professional Accountants," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 19(3), pages 231-248, September.
    9. Barbara Culiberg & Katarina Katja Mihelič, 2017. "The Evolution of Whistleblowing Studies: A Critical Review and Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(4), pages 787-803, December.
    10. Bruce M. Clayton & Chris J. Staden, 2015. "The Impact of Social Influence Pressure on the Ethical Decision Making of Professional Accountants: Australian and New Zealand Evidence," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 25(4), pages 372-388, December.
    11. Giuseppe Attanasi & Ylenia Curci & Patrick Llerena & Maria del Pino Ramos-Sosa & Adriana Carolina Pinate & Giulia Urso, 2019. "Looking at Creativity from East to West: Risk Taking and Intrinsic Motivation in Socially and Culturally Diverse Countries," Working Papers of BETA 2019-38, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    12. Nocetti, Diego C., 2013. "The LeChatelier principle for changes in risk," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 460-466.
    13. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    14. Bruno S. Frey & Susanne Neckermann, 2005. "Auszeichnungen: Ein Vernachl�ssigter Anreiz," IEW - Working Papers 254, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    15. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2009. "Homo Reciprocans: Survey Evidence on Behavioural Outcomes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 592-612, March.
    16. Manna, Ester, 2013. "Mixed Duopoly with Motivated Teachers," MPRA Paper 52041, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Carattini, Stefano & Gillingham, Kenneth & Meng, Xiangyu & Yoeli, Erez, 2024. "Peer-to-peer solar and social rewards: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 340-370.
    18. Sseruyange, J. & Bulte, E., 2018. "Do Incentives matter for Knowledge Diffusion? Experimental Evidence from Uganda," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275896, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Ek, Claes, 2017. "Some causes are more equal than others? The effect of similarity on substitution in charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 45-62.
    20. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2008. "Motivating Altruism: A Field Study," IZA Discussion Papers 3770, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Denunciation. Fraud. Ethics.;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bbz:fcpbbr:v:11:y:2014:i:5:p:24-48. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Lasso (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fucapbr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.