Enron. Con: “He that filches from me my good name … makes me poor indeed”

O’Connell, Brendan

doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2004.02.002

Cited by 50 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is through this interpretive frame, informed by broader social and institutional logic, that the financial markets may be viewed as criminogenic and prone to fraud. This is not so much the skilful use of motives, interests and incentive structures, but, rather, one of knowledge and knowledgeability, where, as the findings revealed, the perpetrators are calculative in their actions because they know the prospect of criminal persecution is minimal and choose to maximise their net utility through criminality for personal gain (Davis & Pesch, 2013;Morales et al, 2014;O'Connell, 2004;Ramamoorti, 2008;Rezaee, 2005;Stalebrink & Sacco, 2007).…”

Section: Discussion and Concluding Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With many incentives linked to the fair value attributed to financial instruments, market actors can be rational (not necessary immoral) in the pursuit of profit (Cooper et al, 2013;Murphy, 2012;Murphy & Free, 2016;O'Connell, 2004). In the Cattles case, where rational deliberation is concerned, an implicit form of intelligibility and knowledgeability of circumventing the rules governing financial crimes were invoked.…”

Section: Rational Deliberationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At play in this representation is the claim that fraudulent practices "follow a path of institutionalization, which converges on senior management as the responsible agent" (Power, 2013, p. 539). Notwithstanding the organisation's promise to its stakeholders to act ethically and maximise profit, Sikka (2010) in his work on tax avoidance noted that fraudulent practices have come to represent the naturalness and normalcy of organisational life (see also Bell & Carcello, 2000;Erickson, Hanlon, & Maydew, 2006;O'Connell, 2004;Strand Norman et al, 2010). Rogue leaders, as they are referred to by Power (2013), use these organisations to engage in fraud against stakeholders with a mixture of false accounting and misrepresentation (Power, 2013, p. 539).…”

Section: Individual Decision Making and The Choice To Offend In Accoumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Theorizing Financial Crimes as Moral Actions

Lokanan

2017

European Accounting Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The paper maintains that all acts of financial crimes can be explained within a general theory of moral action and analyzed as such. In this regard, the paper presents such a theorySituational Action Theory (SAT) -and argues that acts of financial crimes result from a perception-choice process involving rational deliberation and experimental habituation, themselves the outcomes of interactions between individuals and their environments. To examine this argument, the paper draws on two recent high profile fraud cases to critically discuss the extent to which these crimes should be meaningfully and innovatively analysed as moral actions and the moral context in which they occur. The findings indicate that the feature most relevant to a criminogenic is its moral context in relation to the opportunities and frictions that it generates. As such, environmental factors along with psychosocial processes of moral education become particularly important in the explanation of why certain moral contexts emerge in particular kinds of settings at a particular point in time. In this regard, SAT can be used as a powerful overarching framework to gain a more comprehensive understanding of peoples' choice processes to breach moral rules and devise effective crime prevention strategies to combat fraud.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Concluding Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rational Deliberationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Individual Decision Making and The Choice To Offend In Accoumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Theorizing Financial Crimes as Moral Actions

Lokanan

2017

European Accounting Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Andersen was involved in other audit failures during the 1990s (Chaney and Philipich, 2002) and the cultural change at Andersen during the 1980s and 1990s was mirrored at other public accounting firms (O'Connell, 2004;Wyatt, 2004). For example, when Coffee (2004) discusses the very significant increase in the number of earnings restatements in the 1990s and notes that the "overall experiences of the Big…”

Section: Accounting Auditing and The Issue Of Marginsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mary Douglas, risk and accounting failures

Linsley

Shrives

2009

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sociology and anthropology are especially valuable in providing a critical understanding of the risk-related implications of modernity. There has, however, been relatively little discussion of the work of Mary Douglas within accounting although her pioneering writings in the area of risk have been highly influential. This paper uses Douglas' cultural theory of risk to provide an alternative perspective on the demise of Enron and Andersen. The failure at Enron is interpreted through the gridgroup model and analysed as a series of events that threaten to destabilize established cultures. Accounting is thus construed as an activity that exists on the margins of boundaries. There are two important conclusions drawn from the analysis. First, as the worldviews of both the individualist and hierarchical cultures became threatened by the ensuing crisis they collaborated to ensure their perpetuation. This also averted individuals from becoming susceptible to recruitment by subversive egalitarian groups. Second, the individualistic culture of Andersen shaped practices within the firm weakening its ability to act as a gatekeeper and therefore public accounting firms need to modify their cultures if they are to police the margins effectively.

show abstract

“…Until recently, Sutherland's (1949) micro-sociological approach and Cressey's (1953) individualistic explanations on the etiology of fraud have occupied a prominent place in the accounting and audit literature (Albrecht, Howe, & Romney, 1984;Lehman and Okcabol, 2005;Rezaee, 2007;O'Connell, 2007;Ramamoorti, Morrison & Koletar, 2009;Cohen et al, 2010;Jones, 2010;Razaee & Riley, 2010;Sikka, 2010aSikka, , 2010bCooper et al, 2013;Dellaportas, 2013;Free & Murphy, 2013). This explanatory attempt has gained ascendency and is built on a construction that sees fraud as being rooted in the individual's frail morality; it invariably takes the character of the apparently deviant individual(s) into question (Morales et al, 2014: 177;Power, 2013: 526).…”

Section: The Role Of Discourse In Conceptualising "Fraud"mentioning

confidence: 99%