Arthur Andersen

In order “to provide high-quality accounting services”, Arthur Andersen (AA), a Northwestern accounting professor began a enterprise to supply companies to purchasers promoting “integrity and sound audit opinions over higher short-run profits”. The company’s “four cornerstones” was good service, high quality audits, well-managed employees, and earnings for the firm. Their strategy was to give consideration to quality and high standards of audits rather than earnings, a very profitable strategy that led to constant progress through the years.

Don’t waste time Get a verified expert to help you with Essay

Environmental, strategic, and organizational changes

In designing the optimal structure for a given agency, market situations, technology, and authorities regulation should be taken into consideration as these are necessary components and determinants of strategy.

At the top is firm’s exterior enterprise surroundings which comprises of technology, markets, and rules all of which feeds down technique, organizational architecture, incentives and actions, and firm worth.

In order to give attention to generating new enterprise and cut costs AA adopted a brand new strategy which concerned evaluating its companions on how much new business they dropped at the firm.

This newly adopted technique made it more in regards to the numbers and making money. In order to scale back the costs they required partners to retire at the age of 56 years. With this technique it led to the elevated emphasis on income progress as well as expense reduction.

There were new partners that rose to the highest, Steve Samek, a distinguished example of a companion that was able to turn a $50,000 audit fee right into a $3 million audit engagement. Although some rose to the top, such a policy it led to fewer skilled auditors and fewer companions overseeing audits and signing off on inaccurate monetary statements for companies that overstated revenues due to improper write off of property.

Another prominent change inside the agency was when an Andersen engineer, Joseph Glickauf, demonstrated that computer systems were in a place to automate bookkeeping records. This was famous to be a “monumental change within the partnership” and allowed the company to enter the consulting enterprise in 1954. They had been capable of assist their shoppers automate their accounting information they usually had been capable of develop the biggest know-how follow of any accounting firm.

The firm’s exterior environment was also changing in Thirties as the federal government adopted new legal guidelines that required public companies to submit their financial statements to an impartial auditor every year. Added rules led elevated revenues during this era and helped with the firm’s popularity and growth.

In 1998 when Samek grew to become the managing partner he formulated a new strategy the “2X” efficiency evaluation system which included advice on how partners should “empathize” with clients. Along with making organizational architecture adjustments he also changed the culture by making the gown code a relaxed and adopted a new emblem that included a rising solar.

Enron’s Audit due to a few “bad partners”

Arthur Andersen began auditing Enron’s books in 1986. Early 2001 Enron was thought-about the “premier energy company” with a market worth of equity of approximately $75 billion and such a high market worth meant that it was essential to pay shut attention to the books of Enron since there might be heavy reliance on the auditor’s opinion. Enron’s engagement fees accounted for only a small portion of AA’s revenues however many of the revenues got here from a Huston office that was set up in Enron’s Huston headquarters with the partner David Duncan.

In evaluating Andersen’s claim that their issues on the Enron audit had been due to a few “bad partners” I would disagree due to the shut relationship that the 2 corporations shared along with a poorly developed organizational structure. The Huston headquarters had over one hundred fifty Andersen professionals on website that seemingly knew or had been aware of the accounting scandal however selected to ignore it. Professional judgment and independence also was not practiced as noted “there were so many individuals within the Huston workplace with their fingers in the Enron pie if there was an auditor who did not want log out on an audit they would be fired.

This was not the only disaster that AA was involved in which made outsiders questioned their practices and overlook their claim. There have been lawsuits in opposition to Arthur Andersen. Prior to the Enron scandal AA had settled a dispute with the Securities and Exchange Commission paying more than $7 million for accounting and auditing work of Waste Management Corporation. Additionally, the SEC sued an Andersen lead associate on the Sunbeam Corporation audit.

These crises together with their claim that their problem with the Enron audit was due to some “bad partners” was merely the end result of an unsound organizational construction together with insurance policies and practices that the agency carried out. The unsound organizational structure of Arthur Andersen modified the motivation of staff within the firm and modifications throughout the agency over the years certainly one of which was the compensation of companions did not allow for integrity when work was being carried out for these public corporations.

What might have been done differently?

The organizational structure of Arthur Andersen appeared to have gone a different route from what it was intended for and far of the success that Arthur Andersen was brief term and partner based mostly. Policies that had been implemented led companions to interact in mischievous acts to gain extra enterprise. Slowly their policies and practices turned more about money somewhat than high quality audits using the right protocols.

Other than administration who have been concerned in mischievous acts I would recreate or polish existing polices to realign it to their initial strategy which was to provide “quality accounting providers to purchasers and promote integrity and sound audit opinions over greater short-run profits”. It is famous that an sick designed organizational structure can end result in poor efficiency and company failure and AA made material modifications that adjustments their business environment and strategy which led to their collapse. Their flawed organizational architecture made it onerous for brand new expertise (other than partners who were all about numbers) to be discovered. It became extra about making your numbers so I would additionally design a system that allowed for inefficient administration to be replaced by new expertise who are not solely about creating worth for the firm but additionally to fill in gaps which could be in architecture.

Andersen and multitask precept agent theory

Incentive conflicts existed at Arthur Andersen. At AA there was management and companions that acted in their own self interest by way of maximizing their own utility on the expense of the opposite partners that was vested in the company. This also gave the impression to be a recurring downside that affected the corporate as a outcome of on a quantity of events a associate was accused appearing in their very own self interest. Conflict of curiosity with alters the principal agent relationship additionally played a giant part on the rise of the Enron scandal because a widespread concern among buyers, regulators, and the public rose which may have motivated many AA skilled on the Enron engagement to log off on questionable accounting practices. Risky practices to reap brief term advantages paved additionally paved the greatest way for dishonesty and fraud.

Relation between “hard” and “soft” components of the firm’s corporate culture

Hard and gentle parts higher often recognized as the 7S Model is a model of organizational effectiveness was developed at McKinsey & Co. Consulting firm within the 1980’s. It proposes that there are seven elements within a agency that needs to be aligned and bolstered so as to achieve success. Hard elements embody construction, strategy and systems and the soft elements include shared values, abilities, fashion and workers.

Hard elements are influenced and recognized by administration. It is the formal architecture and primary determinant of a firm’s worth. Soft parts however are these intangible parts that are influenced by corporate culture. AA for instance organizational structure, Samek tried to vary the softer elements of AA’s company culture. For instance, the costume code was relaxed, the picket doors at AA’s workplace entrances have been removed, and the firm adopted a new company brand, the rising solar. This gives the company a way of path and motivation and serves as a means for communicating and reinforcing firm goals.

According to this model it’s required that there might be a stability between the exhausting and delicate parts. As it relates to AA there was no good steadiness between both components. At the top of this mannequin are shared values a gentle factor which was a damaged factor that made the model exhausting to attain at AA. There was no proper outlined company tradition at AA so there was nothing to hyperlink how folks will behave in the agency or to hold the structure of the firm up. The idea of shared values should starts at highest degree (i.e. companions of AA) and they want to instill these values to their senior administration who should then proceed the process until it reaches first yr hires. However, if unethical conduct starts on the highest stage the businesses tradition might be broken before it reaches first yr hires and the need undertake the unethical behavior

In addition to altering Andersen’s organizational architecture, Samek tried to change the softer parts of AA’s company tradition. For instance, the gown code was relaxed, the wood doorways at AA’s office entrances have been removed, and the agency adopted a brand new company emblem, the rising sun.

Were actions at Arthur Andersen unique?

There might have been certain environmental elements (i.e. intense competition), opportunities, or lack of rules and monitoring that will motivate different companies to partake in the same unethical choices as AA. There may be no telling whether or not other accounting firms practiced unethical decisions because they might have the ability to better conceal these unethical practices so it goes unnoticed. This situation was not unique to Arthur Andersen. The severity of the scandal made it hard for AA to bounce again while other companies could have been in a place to resolve issues coping with unethical habits to minimize the severity and make it appear miniscule to the general public.

There is beyond little doubt that after the fall of AA and Enron that prime accounting corporations began to ensure that their practices and organizational construction was sound to forestall the same crises such as that of AA from occurring to their company. As a prime associate of another accounting firm throughout Andersen’s demise I would carefully evaluation practices of the agency, and intently observe articles and laws launched by the SEC, GAAP, and different regulatory agencies regarding auditing procedures. Lastly, I would also ensure that the proper protocols are followed concerning current, new, or prior engagements (i.e. training independence, professional judgment or skepticism).

SEC proposed rules in 2000 to limit consulting work by accounting firms

Legislators had been acting in the public’s curiosity as they may have seen that the proposed regulation was flawed and should have stirred up controversy in the securities market. The proposal was beneath scrutiny as it was noted to be “fatally flawed” and existing regulations handed were challenged because it was famous that a extra energetic role wanted to be taken in making modifications within the measurement and reporting system in help of higher info to foster better selections making by corporations, investors and the government.

With the added stress and intense lobbying by the “Big Five” accounting corporations they could have not seen a problem within the firm offering each providers or felt the regulation wanted to be refined.

Enforcing ethical requirements because of Andersen scandal

Whilst it could not have been the main purpose for the AICPA to launch a set of requirements for the conduct of CPAs, the Arthur Andersen scandal actually gave rise to the event of the Code of Professional Conduct. When scandals pertaining to audit of economic statements happen the first person accountable is the firm of the CPA on the audit engagement. The AA scandal has positively heightened the public’s consciousness of the necessity for elevated consideration to all moral enterprise practices by professionals particularly CPA who traders heavily rely on for their opinion.


The AICPA is only to be blamed for not setting larger moral standards for their members and making it a precedence. They wouldn’t have control over unethical conduct of members however they will enforce and clearly state the ramifications. It is necessary to notice that the firm that hires the CPA to carry out services should also instill their very own code of conduct.

Appointment of a model new oversight board

Rather than persevering with to be self regulated after the scandal, the appointment of an oversight board was necessary as they provide unbiased oversight of public accounting firms offering audit services. They register auditors, outline, inspect, and implement particular processes and procedures for compliance of audits as well as for quality control.

Auditors of public accounting corporations are inspected by the PCAOB not lower than as quickly as each 3 years and except any deficiencies, the inspection report becomes public info after completion of an enchantment period. The PCAOB additional has authority to analyze and self-discipline violations of the Sarbanes Oxley Act, board rules, securities laws and professional standards.

This oversight board will supplies perception on all public accounting corporations so investors are assured in relying on their opinions a couple of specific firm’s financial assertion. The Sarbanes Oxley Act allowed more eyes from the surface to look in on the practices of these accounting firms.

Written by Essay Examples

Arthur Conan Doyle puzzle

Art or Propaganda?