This paper examines the Arthur Andersen accounting scandal through the lens of legal compliance, ethical decision-making frameworks, and leadership responsibilities. The analysis explores how mandatory legal requirements apply to the firm's misconduct, speculates on outcomes had Sarbanes-Oxley been enacted earlier, identifies organizational factors that enabled unethical behavior, and demonstrates how strong ethical leadership could have prevented the firm's downfall. The paper argues that conflicts of interest, prioritization of profit over quality, and weak internal controls created a culture of accountability failure that ultimately led to the firm's demise.
After reviewing the mandated requirements for legal compliance, one must determine which requirements apply to the Arthur Andersen case. If the Sarbanes-Oxley Act had been enacted in 1999 rather than 2002, the trajectory of Arthur Andersen's collapse would likely have been significantly different. Similarly, this analysis examines which elements of the framework for ethical decision-making in business could have prevented the firm's downfall, and how strong ethical leadership at the senior management level might have fundamentally altered the organization's fate.
The Arthur Andersen organization made a series of poor ethical choices that became emblematic of broader corporate accounting failures. According to Paul Sweeney of the Financial Executive (July/August 2012), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was enacted "in the wake of corporate accounting scandals" and represented "the most sweeping financial regulation since the Securities Act of 1934" (p. 1). Many people today know Arthur Andersen only in a negative context, but before becoming entangled with Enron and ultimately ceasing operations, Andersen was an accounting firm well known for ethical behavior. Other firms held their work ethic in high regard.
This case illustrates the "rise and fall" of an organization that initially maintained strong moral conduct standards but ultimately compromised those values when leadership placed excessive weight on growth and profits at all costs, even at the expense of stakeholders and clients. This deterioration caused the firm's demise. According to HG.org, the accounting scandals of the late 1990s and early 2000s continue to influence business regulation and oversight in response to pressures from government agencies and the public (p. 1). Understanding how Andersen failed provides crucial lessons for modern corporate governance.
Legal compliance requirements are "established by governments to set minimum standards for responsible behavior—society's codification of what is right and wrong" (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, p. 95). Multiple categories of mandated legal compliance apply to the Arthur Andersen case, though two are particularly direct and relevant.
The first category is protection of consumers. This requirement is governed by the principle of encouraging ethical conduct and preventing harmful schemes against consumers, who in Andersen's case were the firm's clients. Auditing firms exist to provide independent verification of financial statements; when that independence is compromised, consumer protection fails. The second category is incentives to encourage organizational compliance programs. These programs are governed by high standards of honesty and are designed to help organizations comply with established rules and regulations. Andersen lacked adequate internal compliance mechanisms, which allowed misconduct to persist unchecked. The Securities and Exchange Commission's records of Andersen's violations document how both consumer protection and compliance program standards were systematically breached.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 instituted new regulations essential for ensuring accounting and corporate responsibility. Had this legislation been enacted in 1999, the conflict of interest evident in Andersen's operations would have been substantially limited. The act restricts accounting firms from providing a combination of audit and other services for the same clients (Halbert & Ingulli, 2012). This restriction would have required that decisions and activities undertaken by the audit firm be independent of the interests of other services provided by that firm.
This structural separation would have helped ensure that audits remained truly independent, thereby preventing the release of false financial information. Periodic audits of audit firms, mandated under Sarbanes-Oxley, would have revealed the unethical conduct at Arthur Andersen that allowed the publication of false financial statements. Accounting misconduct would have been prevented, as the act discourages the publication of misleading and false statements. Andersen released quarterly statements that projected inflated future sales while concealing crucial financial information about clients like Enron and Waste Management. Under earlier Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, such firms would not have had the opportunity to mislead investors and partners through manipulated financial statements.
Additionally, Sarbanes-Oxley requires auditors to report to committees of the board rather than to company management. Consequently, boards gain the power to scrutinize and investigate audit reports independently. Such investigation of Arthur Andersen reports would have revealed financial inconsistencies before information reached investors and partners. This transparency would have been instrumental in reducing lawsuits against companies such as Sunbeam and the Baptist Foundation of Arizona, which had hired Andersen as their auditor.
Organizational factors played the largest role in enabling the ethical failures at Andersen. Key organizational factors include corporate culture and obedience to authority. As Shaw (2011) notes, ethical culture is bred from corporate culture. At Andersen, the organization was primarily focused on increasing revenue. Employees who continually increased the revenue base through audits and accounts enjoyed high-level promotions. Quantity was emphasized far more than quality, and this organizational priority was fundamentally unethical.
The firm also employed untrained and inexperienced consultants and auditors. This shortage of qualified personnel compromised integrity because inexperienced staff were frequently assigned to client sites where they lacked familiarity with company policies and industry standards. Integrity was another critical factor that Andersen lacked. The firm did not maintain an adequate system of checks and balances to review and verify the work of audit teams. A system of checks and balances in financial reporting involves verifying and then re-verifying the accuracy of financial statements. Such systems enable organizations to identify misconduct among employees and instill a sense of accountability.
However, when such systems are absent—as they were at Andersen—accountability breaks down entirely. This absence perpetuated a cycle of financial impropriety that extended to client companies including Enron, Waste Management, Sunbeam, and the Baptist Foundation of Arizona. The organizational culture therefore lacked a suitable system to ensure compliance with ethical conduct standards, creating an environment in which fraud could flourish without detection.
Had senior management at Arthur Andersen displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders, the firm's trajectory would have been fundamentally different. Strong ethical leadership provides organizational direction toward the establishment and maintenance of an ethical culture. Leaders in an organization are directly linked to its operations and outcomes. As management scholars observe, "It is important for managers to be effective in planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. However, if you cannot exercise good ethical judgment, it does not matter how good you are at planning, organizing, leading, and controlling: Both you and your company are probably doomed to fail" (Managing in a Cultural and Ethical Environment, p. 27).
Ethical leadership manifests itself through personal character and integrity. Had Andersen's senior management exercised honesty and integrity, the organization would have provided partners and investors with essential and accurate financial information. Management that exhibits and encourages ethical behavior significantly reduces the chances of fraud within an organization. Ethical conduct by leadership would have prevented the release of falsified financial statements that misled investors and partners. Furthermore, it would have deterred employees from engaging in fraudulent activities, thereby preventing the lawsuits that ultimately devastated client companies.
The provision of both audit and consultant services by Arthur Andersen presented an inherent conflict of interest. Conflict of interest limits proper judgment and decision-making within an organization. Ethical leadership would have mandated that Andersen institute systems to prevent such conflicts. This would have led to the adoption of policies requiring one service per client rather than simultaneous provision of multiple services. A focus on quality instead of revenue growth would have established an organization committed to providing quality services to clients. Additionally, misconduct and lack of compliance among employees would have been limited through clear ethical guidance from the top. An integrated system in which management participates in checks and balances encourages accountability throughout the organization. Transparency is ensured, and ethical standards are promoted and transferred from senior management to the lowest-level employee in the firm.
For many years, in the earlier days of the Arthur Andersen Accounting Firm, the organization had accountability and therefore stability in ethical decisions. As the firm grew, new senior managers were hired, and ideas and goals for the organization changed. The old ideals of the company gave way to new ones focused on aggressive expansion and profit maximization. Unfortunately, with the changes and the greed of managers seeking to grow an even larger company at any cost, and with excessive compensation or incentives for employees to acquire more clients and increase diversification, the company lost sight of the ethical values for which it had been well known.
You’re 87% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.