GREY AREA OF ETHICS: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEVINAS’
PERSPECTIVE ON ACCOUNTING
STUDENTS’ DELIBERATIVE
MORAL REASONING
Kias Ayu Damara
Supriyadi
( Universitas Gadjah Mada )
ABSTRACT:This study aims to analyze the significance of Levinas‟ perspective on the
deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students when facing a grey area of ethics in a
corporate accounting context. In a between-subjects experimental design, 36 undergraduate
accounting students at Faculty of Economics and Business, UniversitasGadjahMada, were
randomly assigned into two groups, which are treatment group and control group. The first
group received a treatment of Levinas‟ perspective, while the second received no treatment at
all. However, both responded to the same four ethical dilemmas faced by corporate accountants
designed to measure their deliberative moral reasoning. As expected, students in the treatment
group exhibited significantly higher deliberative moral reasoning than those in the control
group. This result thus suggests that Levinas‟ perspective has significance on accounting
students‟ deliberative moral reasoning when facing a grey area of ethics in a corporate
accounting scheme.
Keywords: Levinas‟ perspective, deliberative moral reasoning, accounting students, grey area
of ethics.
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, there has been a widespread belief that the world is facing the era of moral
freedom, when people are more inclined to create their own morality (Wolfe, as cited in Bruhn,
2009).Corporate accountants, as we fully aware, are likely to face the grey area of ethics. It is
possibly due to their position, as explained by Gowthorpe and Amat (2005) that preparers of
financial statements are in a position to manipulate the economic reality view provided by those
statements to interested parties. As such, accountants now, as a group, are regarded to have
lower levels of moral reasoning than other professional groups (Eynon et al., as cited in
McPhail& Walters, 2009).
1
Apart from an individual‟s ethical ideology and moral philosophy, some blamed the
negative effect business and accounting education have on ethical development of students
(McCabe and colleagues, 1991, and Gray and colleagues, 1994, as cited inMcPhail& Walters,
2009). More specifically, some researchers pointed out that ethics education students received
during college are seen to contribute to poor ethical choices (Jennings, 2004; Fleming et al.,
2009). Vis-à-vis to that argument, Roberts also noted that ethics in business can only be
perceived as a strategy of being seen to be ethical, which is the obverse of being responsible (as
cited in Aasland, 2004).
The above issue is important since ethics education which does not depart from the „real
ethics‟ may not result in ethical behavior of students expected to be corporate accountants in
the future. This study thus examines how to enhance the deliberative moral reasoning of
accounting students, which involves the formulation of an intention to act on a particular
ethical dilemma (Thorne, 2000) with Levinas‟ perspective which is argued to be related to what
„real ethics‟ is. The focus on the deliberative moral reasoning is chosen because according to
Fleming et al. (2009), understanding students‟ ability to execute professional judgment is
crucial to assessing the outcome of accounting education.
Moran (in McPhail& Walters, 2009) explained that, for Levinas, the phenomenology of
ethics is associated with „the effort to constrain one‟s freedom and spontaneity in order to be
open to the other person, or more precisely to allow oneself to be constrained by the other.‟ In
other words, there is a tendency to do otherwise than privileging oneself over the others
(Aasland, 2004). Such a motive is what Aasland called ethics. This study then hypothesizes that
there is a significant difference in the deliberative moral reasoning between students with
Levinas‟ perspective and those without it.
2
The hypothesis is tested by employing a 1 x 2 between subject experimental design.
Thirty six undergraduate accounting students who participated in this study were randomly
assigned into two groups, of which treatment group got Levinas‟ treatment,while control group
did not get it, yet, both groups responded to the same measurement of deliberative moral
reasoning in corporate accounting context, which is Fleming et al.‟s adaptation of Accounting
Ethical Dilemma Instrument (AEDI) developed by Thorne. As expected before, there is a
significant difference between deliberative moral reasoning in both groups. Moreover, this
research found that accounting students in the treatment group exhibited a higher level of
deliberative moral reasoning than those in the control group.
The results of this study enrich the studies of behavioral accounting and encourage
further research aimed to enhance the deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students who
later might become corporate accountants.As for accounting students, this research provides a
new approach which may help those who consider to becorporate accountants to exercise a
better professional judgment under a grey area of ethics.
The remaining of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section, background in
regards to ethics education is discussed and hypothesis of this research is developed. The
following section addresses research method for this study and presents the results. At last, this
paper concludes the research, outlines the limitations, as well as proposes some suggestions for
future research.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT
Ethical Ideologies: Idealism vs. Relativism
3
Smith and Quelch (as cited in Lu & Lu, 2010) emphasized that the sources of ethical
disparities among individuals are idealism and relativism. Moral relativism alleges that all
moral standards are concerned with the culture in which they happened (Schlenker& Forsyth,
as cited in Lu & Lu, 2010). Forsyth stated that highly relativistic individuals are more likely to
believe that morals action depend on the encompassing circumstances and individuals involved
than believing simply in absolute moral truths (as cited in Marques & Pereira, 2009). Based on
moral relativism, moral rules cannot be derived from universal moral principles, but abide as a
function of time, place, as well culture. Thus, there is no set of rules that can be formulated to
determine what is right and what is wrong for all individuals (Swaidan,Vitell, &Rawwas,
2003).
Meanwhile, idealism describes the extent to which an individual focuses on the inherent
rightness or wrongness of an action, despite the consequences of that action (Swaidan et al.,
2003). Forsyth (as cited in Lu & Lu, 2010) explained that idealistic individuals comply with
moral absolutes when making moral judgments. Meanwhile, less idealistic people think that
harm is sometimes needed to produce well. They prefer to have a utilitarian perspective
suggesting that an action is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of
people affected by the action, although it may harm a certain group of people (Forsyth, as cited
in Swaidan et al., 2003).
Cognitive-Development Theory
In general, people with cognitive developmental perspective have concentrated on the
study of the development of cognitive reasoning structures which trigger an ethical decision
choice (Thorne, 2000). Referring to Kohlberg‟s model of Cognitive Moral Development
(CMD), there are three levels of moral development, which are pre-conventional, conventional,
4
and post-conventional (McPhail& Walters, 2009). For those with pre-conventional moral
development, the moral acceptability of alternative actions is defined by the rewards and
punishments. For people with conventional moral development, the moral acceptability
confirms to group norms. As for the last, moral development considers universal moral
principles regardless of the impacts on oneself (Thorne, 2000).
Based on this perspective, Rest‟s Model of Ethical Action has been widely used to define
the ethical decision process of accountants (Thorne 1998; Thorne 2000; Jones et al. 2003, as
cited in Fleming et al, 2009). The model has four components including: (1) identification of an
ethical dilemma, (2) ethical judgment, (3) intention to act ethically, and (4) ethical behavior
(Rest, as cited in Fleming et al, 2009).
The focus of this study is on investigating the ethical judgment by examining the
development and level of corporate accountants‟ moral reasoning, especially the deliberative
moral reasoning. As Thorne (2000) stated that deliberative reasoning is similar to an
accountant‟s intention to execute professional judgment to resolve an ethical dilemma.
Ethics for Business vs. Ethics in Business
Business ethics is recently being a very prominent business topic. Moreover, the
dilemmas and debates addressing business ethics have drawn a number of attention from
various parties (Crane &Matten, 2007). Aasland (2009) stated that there is still an unanswered
question left from both American and European literature: Is „business ethics‟ a knowledge of
„ethics for business‟ or is it a knowledge of „ethics in business?
Aasland (2009) stated that ethics for business describes – and prescribes – how
companies respond to ethical challenges in society, and thereby constitutes an important part of
the knowledge called business management. There are several reasons why Aasland regarded
5
ethics for business as instrumental knowledge and not „real ethics‟: 1. The main interest of
business leaders is to find tools that can work instead of looking for the truth about humans as
well as their perspectives on right and wrong; 2. Economic and business management
knowledge is equipped with a logical structure, sometimes called „boomerang effect‟. It means
that it will always pay to behave morally, because if one does not, it will hit back at oneself and
one‟s company as decreased trust or a negative reputation; 3. In the end, pursuing the interest of
a company and more than that of others is self-centered perspective.
In contrast, what Aasland (2009) called ethics in business is the occurrence of the idea
that it is possible to put the other before myself, also within and between business
organizations. Thus, the difference between both terms is that, while ethics for business is
knowledge that business develops and applies for itself, ethics in business is ethics which can
only be applied and developed for the sake ofthe other.
Levinas’ Perspective
Campbell et al. (2009) argued that within a different stream of accounting ethics literature
there is a small but growing discussion about the ethics of Emmanuel Levinas (Shearer, 2002;
MacIntosh, 2004; Roberts, 2003; McKernan and KosmalaMacLullich, 2004) as well as a
sociological translation of Levinas‟ work provided by Zygmunt Bauman (McPhail, 2001;
Funnell, 1998; Junge, 2001, Tester, 2002). Levinas perceived ethics by employing a very
different perspective from traditional moral philosophy. He brought a phenomenological view
to the study of ethics (McPhail& Walters, 2009). He commented:
The absolute nakedness of a face, the absolute defenceless face, without covering,
clothing or mask, is what opposes my power over it, my violence and opposes it in an
absolute way, with an opposition which is opposition itself (cited in Bauman, 1993, p.
73).
6
Levinas questioned, „how does the experience of ethics present itself to us; what is the
given-ness of ethics?‟ He realized that it presents itself through the Other, through the
encounter with the face; through the face to face (McPhail&Walters, 2009). To better
understand Levinas‟ perspective, there is Bauman‟s thought about Levinas‟ work within a
modern social context.
It will be only later, when I acknowledge the presence of the face as my responsibility,
that both I and the neighbor acquire meanings: I am I who is responsible, he is he to
whom I assign the right to make me responsible. It is this creation of meaning of the
Other, and thus also of myself, that my freedom, my ethical freedom, comes to be. (As
cited in Bauman, 1993: 86)
Bauman‟s explanation above makes Levinas‟ perspective more applicable to the
sociological perspective. It is the fundamental of sympathy and core responsibility for others
implied from Levinas‟ work. In order to bring Levinas‟ work into the economy, this research
suggests to once again refer to Aasland‟s book.
Aasland (2004) opened up the issue by explaining what Spinoza called conatus essendi
is. It is a will to preserve oneself, that applies to all unliving, as well as all living. However,
humans do not always follow their conatus. This kind of ethics differs with other ethical
ideologies which stated that ethics is developed from a reason, or even consequences one may
have on oneself as well as the others. Nonetheless, why it emerges is caused by the faculty to
be conscious and to reflect about himself or herself that each human has.
The capacity to question the conatus and set the other before oneself is, by Levinas,
suggested to happen from the encounter with the Other. Yet, he also acknowledges that I not
only meet with the Other, but also the third, the fourth, etc., as the Others. By then, I am forced
to always do evaluation, comparison, and searching for what is just, because the called forth
mercy for each unique Other drives me to always strive for more justice.
7
Levinas‟ grounding of ethics begins with „the way the face of the Other makes a claim on
me to restrain myself‟ (McPhail& Walters, 2009). Moran (as cited in McPhail& Walters, 2009)
explained that for Levinas, the phenomenology of ethics involves „the effort to constrain one‟s
freedom and spontaneity in order to be open to the other person, or more precisely to allow
oneself to be constrained by the other.‟ This idea of good to be able to put the Other before the
I is what Aasland (2009) argued as the „real ethics‟. This research brings this perspective to be
applied in accounting context, particularly in the grey area of ethics faced by corporate
accountants.
Accordingly, the following alternative hypothesis tests the applicability of such
perspective in corporate accounting context.:
Ha: There is a significant difference in the deliberative moral reasoning between accounting
students, treated as corporate accountants, who get Levinas‟ treatment and those who do not.
RESEARCH METHOD
Participants
There were 48 undergraduate accounting students from Faculty of Economics and
Business, UniversitasGadjahMada, who participated in this study. Of the 48 participants, eight
failed the internal validity check. Furthermore, two failed in completing the assignments, and
the other two participants were omitted because they did not complete the assignments as
directed, thus, resulting in a final sample of 36. Based on demographic data, sixty-four percent
of the students were female, seventy-eight percent of the students were in their fourth year of
study at FEB UGM, and all of the participants had completed a business ethics course as well
as a cost accounting course.
Research Design, Variables, and Measurement
8
This study analyzes the significance of Levinas‟ perspective on the deliberative moral
reasoning of accounting students in a corporate accounting context by employing a 1x2
between subject experimental design. The independent variable in this research is Levinas‟
perspective which is embedded in the treatment scenario, whereas the dependent variable being
studied is the deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students treated as corporate
accountants. Moreover, there is a control group who did not get any treatment.
As of the deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students treated as corporate
accountants, it is measured by Fleming et al.‟s adaptation of Accounting Ethical Dilemma
Instrument (AEDI) developed by Thorne. This instrument consists of four different cases which
capture elements of the standards of ethical practice-competence, confidentiality, integrity, and
credibility-set forth in the IMA Statement of Ethical Professional Practice (Institute of
Management Accountants [IMA], as cited in Fleming et al., 2009). Furthermore, each of them
shows the ethical dilemma faced by a corporate accountant and has questions related to how
they believe “the accountant described in the case would realistically respond, taking into
consideration the pressures and tradeoffs that influence accountants‟ behaviors on the job”
(Thorne, as cited in Fleming et al., 2009).
After reading the cases, participants in both groups rated the importance of predetermined
12 items for consideration on five-point scales (SangatPenting, Penting, CukupPenting,
AgakPenting, danTidakPenting). In each case‟s items for considerations, there are three items
representing principled moral development. Afterwards, the participants ranked in order of
decreasing importance the four most important considerations to a realistic response to the
ethical dilemma (Fleming et al., 2009). Each participant‟s DP-SCORE was then calculated by
adding the points assigned to the principled items for consideration based on the rankings for
9
each case (4 points for first rank, 3 points for second rank, 2 points for third rank, and 1 point
for fourth rank) and converting the participant‟s total points to a percentage of total possible
points (Thorne, as cited in Fleming et al., 2009). The total scores provided an insight the extent
to which each participant‟s deliberative moral reasoning affects his/her real action when facing
a grey area of ethics. Further analysis examines the significance of Levinas‟ work on the
deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students.
RESULTS
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics summarizes the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum
of the samples being studied.
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
DPScore1
18
12.50
40.00
25.5556
7.55157
DPScore2
18
2.50
37.50
16.1111
8.36758
Valid N (listwise)
18
The results of the descriptive statistics presented in the Table 4.1.1 describe that there are
36 samples in this research, divided equally to a treatment group (denoted as Group 1) and to a
control group (denoted as Group 2). The deliberative moral reasoning (denoted as DPScore) of
Group 1 has a minimum of 12.50 and a maximum of 40.00, with a mean of 25.5556. On the
other hand, the DPScore of Group 2 shows a minimum of 2.50, a maximum of 37.50, and a
mean of 16.1111.
From the results above, it can be noted that the deliberative moral reasoning of the
treatment group is, on average, higher than that of the control group.
10
Normality Test
Since the data used in this research are ratio data, then a normality test on the data should
be carried out to meet another parametric assumption. Thus, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is
conducted. If the value of K-S significance is greater than the significance level (α) of 0.05,
thus, data are normally distributed. The results of this test are as follows.
Table 2
Test Statisticsa
DPScore
Most Extreme
Absolute
.556
Differences
Positive
.000
Negative
-.556
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
1.667
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
a.
.008
Grouping Variable: Group
The test statistic table indicates that the probability of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
statistic falls below the significance level of 0.05, that is, 0.008. It means that the distributions
of the two groups are significantly different from each other, thus, the null hypothesis stated
that data are normally distributed is rejected.
The Mann-Whitney Test
As data are not normally distributed, then a nonparametric test of two independentsamples, which is Mann-Whitney test, is used.
Table 3
Ranks
Group
DPScore
1
N
Mean Rank
18
24.31
Sum of Ranks
437.50
11
2
18
Total
36
12.69
228.50
Table 4
Test Statisticsb
DPScore
Mann-Whitney U
57.500
Wilcoxon W
228.500
Z
-3.320
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
.001
Exact Sig. [2*(1-tailed Sig.)]
.001a
a.
b.
Not corrected for ties
Grouping Variable: Group
The Mann-Whitney test results as shown in Table 4.4 indicate that there is a significance
difference between both groups. That is, the treatment group exhibited a significantly higher
deliberative moral reasoning than the control group. It is explained by the fact that the test
shows a significance value of 0.001, which is less than the significance level of 0.05. Therefore,
the hypothesis of this study is accepted.
The Independent-Samples T Test
Nevertheless, even though the normality test failed to prove that the data used in this
study are normally distributed, but by referring to the Central Limit Theorem, the data of more
than 30 can be regarded as normally distributed data. Hence, this research performs a
parametric test to draw a conclusion about whether or not the hypothesis is accepted. Analytical
technique used for this study is the independent- samples t-test by utilizing SPSS 15.0. The
independent-samples t-test is conducted to see if there are any significant differences in the
means for two groups in the variable of interest (Sekaran&Bougie, 2010). In this research, the
12
means of deliberative moral reasoning from a treatment group and a control group were tested
to see whether there is a significant mean difference between them.
Table 5
Group Statistics
Group
DPScore
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
1
18
25.5556
7.55157
1.77992
2
18
16.1111
8.36758
1.97226
Table 6
Independent Samples TestLevene’s Test for Equality of Variances
F
DPScore
Equal variances assumed
Sig.
.003
.955
Equal variances not assumed
Table 7
Independent-Samples TestT Test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
T
Df
Sig.
Mean
Std. Error
(2-tailed)
Difference
Difference
Difference
Lower
Upper
3.555
34
.001
9.44444
2.65667
4.04543
14.84346
3.555
33.648
.001
9.44444
2.65667
4.04335
14.84554
Since the significance value of Levene‟s test is 0.955 (p > 0.05), therefore, it can be
assumed that the variances are approximately equal. Furthermore, the t-test results in t value of
3.555 on sig (α) 5% with 34 degrees of freedom. The significance of 0.001, which is less than
13
0.05, implies that there is a significant difference between both groups. People in the treatment
group had significantly higher deliberative moral reasoning than those in the control group.
Thus, the hypothesis stated previously that there is a significant difference on the deliberative
moral reasoning between accounting students who get Levinas‟ treatment and those who do not
is accepted.
DISCUSSION
The results of parametric test and nonparametric test above stated that there is a
significant difference between accounting students in the treatment group and those in the
control group. It is indicated by the Mann-Whitney‟s significance value of 0.001. In addition to
that, the same significance value of 0.001 is also provided by the independent-samples t-test.
Both of them are less than the significance level of 0.05, therefore, it can be implied that there
is a significant difference between deliberative moral reasoning in both groups. Moreover, the
results suggest that accounting students in the treatment group exhibited a higher level of
deliberative moral reasoning than those in the control group did.
Although as far as researcher aware that there is not any research trying to analyze the
significance of Levinas‟ perspective on the deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students
in corporate accounting scheme before, but there are some logical reasons why Levinas‟ work
may have a significant effect on their moral reasoning.
In regards to what Aasland (2009) said, the reason why it may happen is because there is
a tendency that people in general resist the temptation to always maximize gains for
themselves, an idea which dominates the economy world. There is something humanity which
triggers the actions of being ethical and responsible for the sake of the others, that needs no
reason. Due to the faculty to be conscious about themselves and reflect upon themselves that
14
each human has, people may do otherwise than pursue their self-interests. Henceforth, by
realizing that they encounter with the Other, and also the third, the fourth, etc., they will strive
for more justice in their actions. In addition, by valuing that each individual is unique, they
become more objective. That, along with the ability to place the Other before the self, is
somehow in line with post-conventional moral stage in the Kohlberg‟s model used in this
study. That is why Levinas‟ perspective is able to be applied in business and enhance the
deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students who might become corporate accountants
in the near future.
CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
The objectives of this research were to analyze empirically (1) the ethical decision
process of accounting students treated as corporate accountants by measuring the deliberative
moral reasoning they apply to the resolution of a grey area of ethics and; (2) the significance of
Levinas‟ perspective on the deliberative moral reasoning of accounting students in corporate
accounting scheme. Treating undergraduate accounting students enrolled in FEB UGM as
corporate accountants facing ethical dilemmas, the results of this study show statistically that
there is a significance difference in the deliberative moral reasoning exhibited by accounting
students assigned in the treatment group and those in the control group. More specifically, the
treatment group who receiving Levinas‟ treatment, showed significantly higher DP-Score
(deliberative moral reasoning score) when facing ethical dilemmas than those in the control
group and received no treatment at all.After reviewing the statistical facts, the researcher may
conclude that Levinas‟ perspective of putting the Other before the self as well as core
responsibility for others was proven to be able to enhance their deliberative moral reasoning.
15
The implications of this study are limited by research design in general. More
specifically, it is in regards to the scope and number of samples which were limited to only 36
accounting students in their third year and fourth year enrolled in FEB UGM Yogyakarta.
Therefore, the result of this study could not be generalized into all situations. Secondly, the
experiments were carried out in the end of classes, by asking permission from the lecturers. So
that, extraneous variables from either internal of the subjects being studied or the environment
might influence the outcome of the experiments.
Future studies might include more samples of accounting students from several
universities so as to get broader scope. In addition, future research are also suggested to carry
out a class which is really designed for experiment purpose in order to minimize or even
eliminate the chance of extraneous variables to be able to effect the outcome of the experiment.
REFERENCES
Aasland, D. G. (2004).On the Ethics behind "Business Ethics".Journal of Business Ethics, 53
(1/2), 3-8.
Aasland, D. G. (2009).Ethics and economy: After Levinas. London: MayFlyBooks.
Bauman, Z. (1993). Postmodern ethics. Available from http://www.amazon.com/PostmodernEthics-Zygmunt-Bauman/dp/063118693X.
Black, D. E., &Christensen, T. E. (2009). US Managers‟ Use of „Pro Forma‟ Adjustments to
Meet Strategic Earnings Targets. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 36 (3/4),
297-326. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5957.2009.02128.x.
Boynton, W. C., & Johnson, R. N. (2006).Modern auditing: Assurance services and the
integrity of financial reporting. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bruhn, J. G. (2009). The Functionality of Gray Area Ethics in Organizations.Journal of
Business Ethics, 89, 205-214. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9994-7.
Campbell, D., McPhail, K., & Slack, R. (2009). Face Work in Annual Reports: A Study of the
Management of Encounter through Annual Reports, Informed by Levinas and Bauman.
Accounting,
Auditing
&
Accountability
Journal,
22
(6),
907932.doi:10.1108/09513570910980463.
16
Cooper, D.R., & Schindler, P. S. (2011).Business research methods. Boston: McGraw Hill.
Crane, A., &Matten, D. (2007). Business ethics, a European perspective: Managing corporate
citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com/books?id=hLLMwe_TM9cC&q=prominent+business+topic#v=s
nippet&q=prominent%20business%20topic&f=false.
Editor.(2003). United States District Court for the Southern District of California.Retrieved
from http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/comp18205.htm.
Fleming, D. M., Romanus, R. N., &Lightner, S. M. (2009). The Effect of Professional Context
on Accounting Students‟ Moral Reasoning.Issues in Accounting Education, 24 (1), 13-30.
Gowthorpe, C., &Amat, O. (2005). Creative Accounting: Some Ethical Issues of Macro- and
Micro-Manipulation. Journal of Business Ethics, 57 (1), 55-64.
Hogan, C. E., Rezaee, Z., Riley, R. A. Jr., &Velury, U. K. (2008). Financial Statement Fraud:
Insights from the Academic Literature. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 27 (2),
231–252. doi: 10.2308/aud.2008.27.2.231.
Jennings, M. M. (2004). Incorporating Ethics and Professionalism into Accounting Education
and Research: A Discussion of the Voids and Advocacy for Training in Seminal Works
in Business Ethics. Issues in Accounting Education, 19 (1), 7-26.
Jogiyanto,
HM.
(2007).
Metodepenelitianbisnis:
pengalaman.Yogyakarta: BPFE.
Salah
kaprahdanpengalaman-
Lu, L.-C., & Lu, C.-J. (2010). Moral Philosophy, Materialism, and Consumer Ethics: An
Exploratory Study in Indonesia. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 193–210.
doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0256-0.
Marques, P. A., & Pereira, J. A. (2009).Ethical Ideology and Ethical Judgments in the
Portuguese Accounting Profession.Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 227–
242.doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9845-6.
McPhail, K., & Walters, D. (2009).Accounting and business ethics. New York, NY: Routledge.
Megan, O., Haţegan, C., Caciuc, L., Cotleţ, B. (2009). The Cash-Flow Statement – Between
True and Manipulation.Annals of the University of Petroşani, Economics, 9 (2), 127-136.
Prasetya,
D.
(2011,
September
4).
ProdukSingapuradanJepangGempur
Indonesia.KOMPAS.Retrieved from
http://bisniskeuangan.kompas.com/read/2011/09/04/1945029/Produk.Singapura.dan.Jepa
ng.Gempur.Indonesia.
Sekaran, U., &Bougie, R. (2010).Research methods for business: a skill-building approach.
New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
17
Swaidan, Z., Vitell, S. J., &Rawwas, M. Y. A. (2003). Consumer Ethics: Determinants of
EthicalBeliefs of African Americans. Journal of Business Ethics 46, 175-186.
Thorne, L. (2000). The Development of Two Measures to Assess Accountants‟ Prescriptive
and Deliberative Moral Reasoning. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 12, 139-169.
Turner, J. L., Mock, T. J., & Srivastava, R. P. (2003). An Analysis of the Fraud Triangle.
Retrieved from
http://aaahq.org/audit/midyear/03midyear/papers/Research%20Roundtable%203-TurnerMock-Srivastava.pdf.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A
I.
Descriptive Statistics
N
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
DPScore1
18
12.50
40.00
25.5556
7.55157
DPScore2
18
2.50
37.50
16.1111
8.36758
Valid N (listwise)
18
II.
Normality Test
Table 2
Test Statisticsa
DPScore
Most Extreme
Absolute
.556
18
Differences
Positive
.000
Negative
-.556
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
1.667
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
a.
.008
Grouping Variable: Group
III.
The Mann-Whitney Test
Table 3
Ranks
N
Mean Rank
Group
Sum of Ranks
DPScore 1
18
24.31
437.50
2
18
12.69
228.50
Total
36
Table 4
Test Statisticsb
DPScore
Mann-Whitney U
Wilcoxon W
228.500
Z
a.
b.
IV.
57.500
-3.320
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
.001
Exact Sig. [2*(1-tailed Sig.)]
.001a
Not corrected for ties
Grouping Variable: Group
The Independent-Samples T Test
Table 5
Group Statistics
19
Group
DPScore
N
Mean
Std.
Std. Error
Deviation
Mean
1
18
25.5556
7.55157
1.77992
2
18
16.1111
8.36758
1.97226
Table 6
Independent Samples TestLevene’s Test for Equality of Variances
F
DPScore
Equal variances
Sig.
.003
.955
assumed
Equal variances not
assumed
Table 7
Independent-Samples TestT Test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Sig.
Mean
Std. Error
(2-tailed)
Difference
Difference
34
.001
9.44444
3.555 33.648
.001
9.44444
t
3.555
Df
Difference
Lower
Upper
2.65667
4.04543
14.84346
2.65667
4.04335
14.84554
APPENDIX B
RESEARCH INTRUMENT*partial
20
TREATMENT GROUP
BAGIAN I
Kasus Financial Fraud PT XYZ*
PT XYZ adalah sebuah perusahaan publik yang menjual perangkat lunak dan berbasis
di Jakarta. Pada tahun 200X, publik digemparkan oleh adanya sebuah kasus financial fraud
yang membawa nama perusahaan tersebut. Menurut keterangan resmi yang dirilis oleh media,
tujuan dari fraud tersebut adalah untuk meningkatkan pendapatan dan harga saham perusahaan.
Untuk mencapai tujuan ini, PT XYZ sengaja menyusun laporan keuangan yang secara material
tidak wajar selama 11 kuartal secara berturut-turut, antara bulan April 199X hingga Desember
200X.
Aksi kecurangan tersebut dilakukan oleh beberapa karyawan dan manajemen tingkat
atas dengan melaporkan pendapatan senilai ratusan juta terkait dengan kontrak tidak mengikat
(non-binding arrangement) dengan pelanggan, yang tidak sesuai dengan PABU. PT XYZ
kemudian berusaha menutupi kecurangan tersebut dengan melakukan berbagai aksi lain seperti
membukukan kontrak tersebut. Seperti yang sudah dapat diprediksi, para pelanggan tidak
membayar, sehingga rekening piutang di neraca menggelembung. Untuk membuat piutang
seakan tertagih dengan cepat, manajer senior di PT XYZ melakukan transaksi dengan sebuah
bank untuk dapat menukarkan piutang dengan kas. PT XYZ mencatat transaksi ini sebagai
penjualan piutang dan menghilangkannya dari neraca perusahaan.
Ada tiga masalah dalam kontrak ini. Pertama, PT XYZ sudah memberikan bank
tersebut recourse (jaminan bahwa apabila timbul default dalam pembayaran piutang, maka
bank dapat menagih pembayarannya kepada PT XYZ) dan membayar atau membeli kembali
piutang yang tidak terbayarkan tersebut. PT XYZ seharusnya mencatat kontrak tersebut sebagai
pinjaman dan tetap meninggalkan piutang di neraca. Kedua, beberapa piutang yang “dijual”
tersebut tidak valid karena para pelanggan tidak diwajibkan untuk membayar. Ketiga, beberapa
nota yang “dijual” tersebut palsu. Karyawan senior berusaha menyembunyikan kecurangan
tersebut dengan cara writing-off rekening piutang. Kasus financial statement fraud ini
menyebabkan harga saham PT XYZ anjlok hingga akhirnya PT XYZ bangkrut dan para
stakeholders dirugikan.
21
Kasus financial fraud PT XYZ atau bahkan kasus-kasus serupa yang terjadi di
perusahaan lain tentunya tidak akan terjadi apabila pihak manajemen maupun karyawan tidak
menghalalkan segala cara agar harga saham dan pendapatan meningkat, atau agar kinerjanya
terlihat baik. Walaupun pada akhirnya mereka akan dihadapkan pada beberapa pilihan dalam
proses pengambilan keputusan, namun seharusnya mereka tidak mengambil keputusan yang
hanya menguntungkan diri mereka sendiri maupun perusahaan, ataupun hanya melihat
konsekuensi dari keputusan mereka terhadap perusahaan saja. Mereka seharusnya sadar bahwa
keputusan yang akan diambilnya adalah respons terhadap tanggung jawab mereka terhadap
banyak pihak (stakeholders/pemangku kepentingan secara luas), bukan hanya terhadap para
pemegang saham saja. Hal tersebut akan menyebabkan mereka mampu menempatkan
kepentingan orang lain di atas kepentingan sendiri. Selain itu, mereka akan mempertimbangkan
adanya keberadaan pihak-pihak lain yang berkepentingan guna mencari lebih banyak keadilan
(justice) bagi semua pihak.
*kasus diadaptasi dari kasus Peregrine System, Inc.
Sumber:
Editor.(2003). United States District Court for the Southern District of California.Retrieved
from http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/comp18205.htm.
Pernyataan
1. Manipulasi terhadap laporan keuangan fair untuk dilakukan demi kepentingan
para pemegang saham (shareholders).
STS
TS
N
S
SS
2. Apabila Anda bertindak sebagai pihak manajemen, maka dalam suatu proses pengambilan
keputusan, Anda akan menempatkan kepentingan para pemangku kepentingan (creditor,
customer, masyarakat, pemerintah, dan lain-lain) di atas kepentingan Anda dan perusahaan.
STS
TS
N
S
SS
3. Kebebasan Anda dalam mengambil suatu keputusan bisnis dibatasi oleh adanya
pertimbangan atas keberadaan pihak-pihak lain yang berkepentingan (investor, creditor,
22
customer, masyarakat, pemerintah, dan stakeholder lainnya) dan akan terkena dampak dari
keputusan yang akan Anda ambil.
STS
TS
N
S
SS
BAGIAN II
Kasus Perusahaan
Alice dan Perusahaan ABC
Alice adalah seorang staf akuntan dan CMA (Certified Management Accountant) di
Perusahaan ABC.Perusahaan tersebut mengembangkan sistem akuntansinya sendiri dengan
bantuan konsultan. Sistem yang diberi namaACME Accounting System tersebut mulai
dioperasikan tahun ini, sesaat sebelum perusahaan mempekerjakan Alice. Sebagai bagian dari
tugas Alice, Alice diminta oleh bosnya untuk mengevaluasi quality control sistem akuntansi itu
sebagai persiapan untuk audit tahunan perusahaan. Alice menemukan beberapa kelemahan
pengendalian yang parah di dalam sistem ACME. Sebelum memberikan laporan ke pihak
manajemen ABC, Alice diberitahu oleh bosnya untuk memodifikasi komentar negatif terkait
dengan sistem akuntansi ACME dan untuk menunggu dan melihat saja jika auditor menemukan
suatu masalah.
Secara realistis, apakah Alice seharusnya mengubah laporannya? (Berilah tanda √ pada
satu pilihan yang tersedia di bawah)
____ Sebaiknya mengubah laporannya
____ Tidak dapat memutuskan
____ Tidak mengubah laporannya
Di dalam proses memberikan nasihat untuk Alice, apakah sebaiknya dia mengubah
laporannya atau tidak, ada banyak hal yang harus dipertimbangkan. Di bawah ini adalah daftar
beberapa hal yang dapat menjadi pertimbangan. Berikanlah suatu penilaian akan pentingnya
masing-masing pertimbangan di bawah ini:
23
Skala Kepentingan
SP
P
CP
AP
TP
1. Apakah kelemahan pada sistem ACME dapat
diperbaiki
dengan
mudah,
yakni
dengan
mengimbangi pengendalian yang lain.
2. Apakah pegawai yang baik itu adalah pegawai yang
tunduk pada keputusan atasannya.
3. Apakah pekerjaan Alice dapat terancam jika dia
menolak merevisi laporannya.
4. Apakah pertimbangan yang wajar mengenai posisi
keuangan perusahaan dapat digunakan untuk
memprediksi reputasi professional.
5. Apa yang terbaik untuk perusahaan Alice.
6. Apakah Alice memiliki tugas untuk memastikan
bahwa laporan itu akurat.
7. Apa nilai potensial dari suatu audit independen
sebagai pengganti penilaian terbaru masyarakat
mengenai nilai perusahaan.
8. Bagaimana masyarakat seharusnya dilayani.
9. Apakah perusahaan benar-benar peduli dengan
pengendalian internal atau apakah yang mereka
benar-benar inginkan hanya opini audit yang bersih.
10. Akankah dengan mengubah laporan konsisten
dengan apa yang Alice pikir benar.
11. Tindakan Alice apa yang akan diharapkan rekanrekan kerja Alice di perusahaan.
12. Apakah faktor-faktor yang relevan dalam
menentukan tanggung jawab professional Alice.
24
Taman KT I/466●Yogyakarta, Indonesia55133●081215701870 ●kiasayudamara@gmail.com
KIAS AYUDAMARA
Personal Information
Date of Birth
Place of Birth
Marital
Status
Nationality
:
:
:
:
May 9th, 1989
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Single
Indonesian
Education
Degrees
November 2011 — June
2012
Uppsala University, Sweden
Lotus Erasmus Mundus
Exchange Program
September 2009 —
February 2010
Hiroshima University of
Economics, Japan
Short Term Exchange
Program
July 2007— November 2011
UniversitasGadjahMada,
Indonesia
Bachelor Degree in
Accounting with
Cumulative GPA of 3.74 out
of 4.00 Scale
June 2004— July 2007
SMA N 1 Yogyakarta
High School Diploma
Professional Experience
February 2011— July 2011
Faculty of Economics and
Business,
UniversitasGadjahMada
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Lecture‟s Assistant for Accounting Principles I and Business Ethics Courses
Responsible
for
grading
and
August 2010— January
2011
Faculty of Economics and
Business,
UniversitasGadjahMada
tutoring.
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Lecture‟s Assistant for Advanced Financial Accounting I and Advanced Accounting II
Courses
Responsible for grading and tutoring.
25
Other Experiences
January 2011— February
2011
ACICIS Buddy Program
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Assisting the incoming international students finding their housings and introducing local
culture
and
environment
to
them.
July 2010— August 2010
UGM Community Service
Magelang, Indonesia
The program was conducted in order to help the local people in TersanGede Village,
Magelang, improve their ways of making use of coconut products mainly by giving them
some kind of workshops of how to make by-products of coconuts. I was acting a treasurer
for various subunit activities and as a coordinator for social events held during the
meantime.
March 2010— April 2010
Voluntary Work
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Giving English lesson for orphans at one of orphanages in Yogyakarta.
September 2009— February 2010
Community Service
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Responsible for teaching English at local elementary school and organizing social
activities
with
Gion
Community
Center,
Hiroshima.
Awards
Lotus Erasmus Mundus Scholarship, November 2011-May 2012
PPA (Academic Achievement Improvement) Scholarship, January 2010-Desember 2011
JASSO (Japan Student Services Organization) Scholarship, September 2009-February
2010
Skills
Computer Skills: Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Power Point), Photoscape
Language Skills: Indonesian (native speaker), English (fluent-received from either formal
or non-formal education), Japanese (basic)
Personal Interests
Travelling
Reading and writing
Photography
26
SUPRIYADI
Associate Professor
E-mail: pri@mmugm.ac.id
1) 1988
Undergraduate Degree in Accounting (Drs.),
Faculty of Economics, Universitas Gadjah
Mada
EDUCATION
2) 1993
Master of Science in Accounting at the
University of California, Fresno, USA
3) 1998
Doctoral
Degree
in
Accounting
at
the
University of Kentucky, USA
1. Financial Accounting
2. Behavioral Accounting
3. Business and Professional Ethics
RESEARCH
INTERESTS





COURSE TAUGHT
PROFESSIONAL
Introductory Accounting I (Undergraduate Program)
Intermediate Accounting I (Undergraduate Program)
Behavioral Accounting (Master of Science Program)
Business and Professional Ethics (Master of Applied Program)
Behavioral Research in Accounting (Doctorate Program)
The Indonesian Institute of Accountant
ORGANIZATION


MEMBERSHIP
A Member of Appealing Committee (2006-2011)
The Head of Yogyakarta Branch (2011-2016)
Peer Reviewed Journal
1.
2011 Exploring the Model of Internet Use: Indonesian
Contect.
INTELLECTUAL
Co-Author,
Published
in
UTCC-
International Journal of Business and Economics
CONTRIBUTION1
(Thailand), Vol. 3, No. 1
2.
2010 The Moderating Effect of Procedural Justice on the
Effectiveness
of
the
Balanced
Scorecard
1
For each of the intellectual contributions, please categorize whether the intellectual contribution is
Learning and Pedagogical Research (contribution influence the teaching-learning activities of the school), or
Contributions for Practice (influence professional practice in the faculty member’s field), or Discipline-based
Research (contributions add to the theory or knowledge base of the faculty member’s field).
27
Performance Measures in Improving Managerial
Performance through Organizational Commitment.
Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business,
Vol. 12.No. 3
3.
2005 Analisis
Moderasi Set Kesempatan Investasi
Terhadap Hubungan Antara Kebijakan Deviden
dan Aliran Kas Bebas dengan Tingkat Leverage
Perusahaan (Moderation Analysis on Investment
Opportunity toward The Relationship Between
Dividend Policy and Free Cash Flow with
Company‟s
Leverage
Level).
Co-Author,
Published in Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Vol. X1
No. 2
4.
2005 The
Influence
of
Contingency
Factor
as
Moderating Variable to the Relation between
Users‟
Participation
and
the
Success
of
Information System in PTP Nusantara – XIV
(Persero).
Co-author.
Published
in
Jurnal
Sosiosains Vol. 18, No. 1
5.
2005 Pengaruh Krisis Moneter terhadap Nilai Tambah
Informasi Arus Kas (The Influence of Monetary
Crisis on the Value Added of Cash Flow
Information). Co-author. Published in Jurnal
Akuntansi & Investasi, Vol. 6, No. 1
6.
2003 Executive Involvement and Participation in the
Management of Information System. Co-author.
In: Jurnal Sosiohumanika, Vol. 16A, No. 3
Research Monograph
1.
2011 Examining Order Effect and Response Mode on
Investment Judgment. Co-Author. Presented in the
peer-reviewed
international
conference
in
28
Amsterdam, The Netherland 2012.
2.
2011 The
Effectiveness
of
Flexible
Working
Arrangement and Stress Management Training in
Mitigating Auditors‟ Burnout: An Experimental
Study. Co-Author. Presented in the peer-reviewed
international conference in Melbourne, Australia
2012.
3.
2010 Culture and Effectiveness of Good Corporate
Governance Implementation: Indonesian Case
Study. Research Project sponsored by POSCO
South
Korea
(Peer-reviewed
Research
Competition). Co-Author.
Professional Experience2
1.
2008 – present
Director of Master of Science and
Doctorate Programs, FEB, Universitas
Gadjah Mada
2.
2011 – present
Head of the Indonesian Accounting
Association – Yogyakarta Branch
3.
2007 – 2011
A Member of the Appealing Committee
of
PROFESSIONAL
QUALIFICATION
the
Indonesian
Accounting
Association
4.
2007 – 2008
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs,
FEB, Universitas Gadjah Mada
5.
2004 – 2007
Director of Master of Management
Program, Universitas Gadjah Mada
6.
2003 – present
Editorial
Manajemen
Board
Member,
Akuntansi
dan
Jurnal
Sistem
Informasi MAKSI, Master of Science in
Accounting
Program,
Diponegoro
2
Position hold in a company or organization as BoD, Commissioner, etc. OR Position hold in profession
organization
29
University, Semarang
7.
2003 – present
Editorial Board Member, Jurnal Telaah
dan Riset Akuntansi, Syiah Kuala
University, Banda Aceh
8.
2000 – present
Managing
Director,
Gadjah
Mada
International
Journal
of
Business,
Master
Management
Program,
of
Universitas Gadjah Mada
9.
2000 – present
Editorial Board Member, Jurnal Bisnis
dan Akuntansi, STIE Trisakti, Jakarta
10. 2000 – present
Editorial Board Member, The Journal of
Accounting,
Economics
Management,
Research,
Faculty
and
of
Economics UTY, Yogyakarta
11. 2000 – present
Editorial Board Member, Media Riset
Akuntansi, Auditing, dan Informasi,
Trisakti University, Jakarta
12. 2000 – present
Editorial Board Member, Indonesian
Management and Accounting Research,
Trisakti University, Jakarta
Yogyakarta, June 26, 2012
Supriyadi
30
STATEMENT
I confirm that this article has not been previously published elsewhere, nor is it
under consideration by any other publisher.
Yogyakarta, 30 June 2012
First Author
KiasAyuDamara
31