An increasing number of ethical scandals have kept the hotel industry in the spotlight in recent years. “Hotel ethical scandals include, but are not limited to, cases of sexual harassment, different types of discrimination, lack of workplace diversity, violations of international business and cross-cultural norms, environmental injustice and sustainability, marketing and pricing, theft, and blame shifting, all over the world” (Dimitriou, 2013). Cases like Starwood Hotels accusing Hilton of trade secret theft (Orey, 2009), or individual hotel employees suing the company they worked for on the grounds of being treated unethically such as Charlotte Thomas who sued Marriott for age and sex discrimination (Cadwallader, 2009) are some of the characteristic examples which reflect the unethical conditions and behaviors that currently exist and prevail in the hotel industry. This study aims to highlight these issues and find some answers to these challenges in an effort to help the hotel industry address them. The only way to achieve this goal is by going to the root of the problem of unethical behavior and closely examining the factors which promote and encourage ethical behavior. In other words, to find answers to the following questions: What factors could influence hotel employees to switch to a more ethical decision-making? What factors could cause them to conduct their business in a more responsible manner? Directors’ and researchers’ studies on non-hospitality environments blamed the companies’ organizational culture, the intense competition, or the people’s personal characteristics for the reasons why employees steal or behave in an irresponsible and inappropriate manner in a working environment (Weber, Kurke, & Pentico, 2003). Other studies found that peers can significantly influence the ethical behavior of salespeople (Jones & Kavanagh, 1996; Lantos, 1999; Singhapakdi & Vitell, 1990). Some researchers (Cagle & Baucus, 2006; Hollier, Blankenship, & Jones, 2013) contended that business ethics education has a positive effect on the way business and finance students think and behave whereas others supported that managers play a key role when it comes to the ethical behavior of their subordinates (Jaffe & Tsimerman, 2005). However, all these studies focused on non-hospitality employees and students and there has been a lack of research on the factors influencing the ethical behavior of employees in hospitality settings. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to close this gap in the hospitality literature and identify the factors influencing the ethical behavior of employees in the hotel industry. The signifi- cance of this study is immense as it also aims to assist the hotel industry gain a deeper understanding of what determines employees’ ethical behavior and leads to a more responsible and sound decision-making. The most important stimulus that inspired both the research framework and survey instrument for this study was Deshpande, Joseph, & Prasad’s (2006) study, which was an in-depth analysis of factors influencing the ethical behavior of hospital personnel. Research findings revealed that ethical behavior of peers, ethical behavior of successful managers, and professional education impacted the ethical behavior of the respondents. In addition, female nurses behaved more ethically than their male counterparts. The current study attempts to replicate Deshpande, Joseph, and Prasad (2006) study in hotel settings and examine whether it will yield similar results. It must be noted that the current study is also based on a previous work that the first author presented at the EuroCHRIE 2013 conference in Freiburg, Germany (Dimitriou, 2013). The research model used for this study is based on Deshpande et al. (2006) research model and focuses on the factors influencing the ethical behavior of hotel employees as seen in Fig. 1.

Public sector auditors play a crucial role in ensuring the credibility of financial and nonfinancial performance of government entities by providing quality auditing which ultimately improve the level of accountability and integrity of the government to the public at large (Buang, 2011). This is in line with the urge by the former Auditor General of Malaysia, Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Hj. Ambrin Bin Buang who claims that “Through quality auditing, the Government and citizens will obtain an objective and without prejudice, information on the weaknesses in managing public service” (Buang, 2014). In Malaysia, the National Audit Department (NAD) is an independent executive authority that manages audit activities for government entities. According to the Audit Act 1957, NAD is authorized to perform the auditing of accounts of the central government and state governments (Malaysian Government, 2000, p. 180). Besides being knowledgeable about auditing, accounting and other work related matters, it is equally important for auditors to remain ethical in their daily actions at work. Ethics is an essential professional of all professions, including accounting and auditing (Aaker, 1989). It is even more important for public sector auditors to behave ethically in their day-to-day delivery of work as their role is important in safeguarding the interest of the society (Mohamed Saat et al., 2012). Recent court cases involving unethical activities such as fraud and corruption in public sector throughout the developed world such as the United Kingdom and the United States (Simpkins, 2005) have put the spotlight on public sector auditors. The situation is perhaps even more worrying in parts of Asia. For instance, recent data from the Indonesian Government Internal Auditor Association (AAIPI) shows that 94% of government internal auditors cannot detect fraud and corruption (Ashari, 2013).

مقاله سال 2016

این مطالعه بدون محدودیت نیست. اول ، اقلام تعهدی با استفاده از اقلام تعهدی کل ، مدل جونز و مدل اصلاح شده ی جونز مورد سنجش قرار می گیرند. طبق گفته ی مک نیکولز (2000) ، معیار های مدیریت سود بر اساس اقلام تعهدی کل ممکن است مدیریت سود را به طور نادرست مشخص کنند و منجر به استنتاج های گمراه کننده در مورد رفتار مدیریت سود شودند ، همان طور که در این مدل ها رشد سود های بلند مدت در نظر گرفته نمی شود. علاوه بر این ، پژوهش های قبلی ( مانند Dopuch و همکاران 2012) نشان می دهند که اگر شرکت های صنعتی یکنواخت نیستند ، اقلام تعهدی اختیاری که به صورت مقطعی برآورده شده اند ممکن است آشفته باشند و بررسی های حاصل را تحت تاثیر قرار دهند (گوول و همکاران 2009).

مقدمه
مسائل مربوط به استقلال و شایستگی حسابرس هم چنان توجه دانشگاهیان، پزشکان، و قانون گذاران را به خود جلب می کنند. یک موضوع اخلاقی خاص که در سال های اخیر در ادبیات حسابداری پدید آمد این است که آیا حسابرسان برای دستیابی به هزینه های بیش تر ، بیش از حد مجاز مشتری می پذیرند. با پذیرش تعداد زیادی از مشتریان ،حسابرسان ممکن است توانایی خود را برای انجام هر حسابرسی با توجه به استاندارد های حسابرسی که به طور کلی پذیرفته شده اند، از دست دهند ، بنابراین اظهارات اخلاقی و حرفه ای ضروری در مورد صلاحیت و سعی و کوشش را نقض می کنند. هر چند تحقیقات قابل توجهی به بررسی این موضوع پرداخته اند که آیا داشتن مدیریت های متعدد پیامد های مالی را افزایش می دهند یا کاهش می دهند ( به عنوان مثال فیش و شیوداسانی 2006 ؛ هووتون و همکاران ،2008 ؛ پری و پیر 2005) ، پژوهش های اندکی وجود دارند که ارتباط میزان مشتریان حسابرس را با کیفیت حسابرسی تعیین می کنند. عدم موفقیت حسابرسی که در آن شرکت یک روز فعال و در روز بعد ورشکسته است ( به عنوان مثال بانک اعتباری و بازرگانی بین المللی انگلستان) معمولا به عنوان خطای اخلاقی حسابرسان به علت عدم موفقیت در هشدار دادن به سهامداران در نظر گرفته می شود (بوید 1996). سوال پژوهشی که در این جا ایجاد می شود ، حائز اهمیت می باشد زیرا این خطاهای اخلاقی برای فروپاشی بسیاری از شرکت های بزرگ مورد انتقاد قرار می گیرند ، مانند عدم موفقیت آرتور اندرسون برای تشخیص تقلب در شرکت (استابوس 2005). مشغولیت هر حسابرس احتمالا کیفیت حسابرسی و در نتیجه توانایی حسابرسی برای تشخیص مدیریت سود را تحت تاثیر قرار می دهد.