IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v14y2004i03p479-498_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Identification and Categorization of Auditors’ Virtues

Author

Listed:
  • Libby, Theresa
  • Thorne, Linda

Abstract

In this paper, we develop a typology of auditors’ virtues through in-depth interviews with nine exemplars of the audit community. We compare this typology with prescribed auditors’ virtues as represented in the applicable Code of Professional Conduct. Our comparison shows that the Code places a primary emphasis on mandatory virtues including the virtues of “independent,” “objective,” and “principled.” While the non-mandatory virtues, which involve “going beyond the minimum” and “putting the public interest foremost,” were identified by our exemplars as essential to the auditor’s role, they received little or no emphasis in the Rules of Professional Conduct. We find this particularly alarming, given that the exemplars interviewed for this study viewed these virtues are essential to the auditors’ role. If the audit profession wishes to uphold public confidence by encouraging the possession of non-mandatory auditors’ virtues, our research suggests that non-mandatory auditors’ virtues should be explicitly described and included in rules of professional conduct.

Suggested Citation

  • Libby, Theresa & Thorne, Linda, 2004. "The Identification and Categorization of Auditors’ Virtues," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 479-498, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:14:y:2004:i:03:p:479-498_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00007107/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wally Smieliauskas & Kathryn Bewley & Ulfert Gronewold & Ulrich Menzefricke, 2018. "Misleading Forecasts in Accounting Estimates: A Form of Ethical Blindness in Accounting Standards?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 437-457, October.
    2. Céline Baud & Marion Brivot & Darlene Himick, 2021. "Accounting Ethics and the Fragmentation of Value," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(2), pages 373-387, January.
    3. Glen Kobussen & Suresh Kalagnanam & Ganesh Vaidyanathan, 2014. "The Impact of Better‐than‐Average Bias and Relative Performance Pay on Performance Outcome Satisfaction," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, March.
    4. Yves Mard & Christelle Chaplais & Sylvain Marsat, 2014. "De la possibilité d'accroître l'éthique de l'auditeur : Le cas d'une formation," Post-Print hal-01899102, HAL.
    5. Ikhlas Hentati-Klila & Saida Dammak-Barkallah & Habib Affes, 2017. "Do auditors’ perceptions actually help fight against fraudulent practices? Evidence from Tunisia," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 21(3), pages 715-735, September.
    6. Everett, Jeff & Tremblay, Marie-Soleil, 2014. "Ethics and internal audit: Moral will and moral skill in a heteronomous field," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 181-196.
    7. Rafael Morales-Sánchez & Manuel Orta-Pérez & M. Ángeles Rodríguez-Serrano, 2020. "The Benefits of Auditors’ Sustained Ethical Behavior: Increased Trust and Reduced Costs," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(2), pages 441-459, October.
    8. Cameron Graham & Martin E. Persson & Vaughan S. Radcliffe & Mitchell J. Stein, 2023. "The State of Ohio’s Auditors, the Enumeration of Population, and the Project of Eugenics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 565-587, October.
    9. David Dawson, 2018. "Measuring Individuals’ Virtues in Business," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(4), pages 793-805, February.
    10. Anna Samsonova-Taddei & Javed Siddiqui, 2016. "Regulation and the Promotion of Audit Ethics: Analysis of the Content of the EU’s Policy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 183-195, November.

    More about this item

    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:cup:buetqu:v:14:y:2004:i:03:p:479-498_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    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.