1 INTRODUCTION

For managers, accounting professionals and other stakeholders, concerns around corporate fraud have come to the forefront in recent years, manifesting in increasing attention to the development of detection and prevention measures. The 2020 report from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners‎ (ACFE) indicates that whistleblowing is the most effective tool in fraud detection (43%), followed by internal auditing (15%) and management review (12%). Part of its effectiveness is due to its timeliness: companies with whistleblowing channels generally take less time to detect wrongdoing and spend lesser financial resources on investigating the same (Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, 2020).

On the one hand, the literature indicates that anonymous reporting, fraud severity, the perception of duty to report and ethical leadership contribute to the will to report (Latan et al., 2012; Robinson et al., 2012; Silva & Sousa, 2017). Alternately, perceptions around the cost of speaking up, the possibility of retaliation, and proximity with peers reduce the will to report (Taylor & Curtis, 2010; Dalton & Radtke, 2013). With that in mind, studies on the topic in Brazil have analyzed whistleblower intention as observed among accounting professionals (Viera et al., 2015; Silva & Sousa, 2017). There exists a gap in understanding around this phenomenon when present in other areas of the profession, for example, in auditing (Fajardo & Cardoso, 2014).

The auditing professional is witness to the day-to-day activities of a variety of companies across engagements, which often presents challenging situations born of the client relationship: navigating internal controls deficiencies, managing confidential and privileged financial information, and aggressive accounting policies, to name a few. Further, proximity to clients can be advantageous in identifying employment opportunities, especially as the auditor’s growing familiarity with their business pose benefits to the client. According to Brazilian Accounting Rules PG 100 and PA 290 (R2), these incentives are understood to influence auditor behavior and, even when intentions are legitimate in fact, they stand to compromise independence in thought or appearance, leading to threats from self-review, familiarity, and defense of client interests.

Consequently, loss of independence can be a key ingredient in the evolution of fraud schemes - Enron and Worldcom (Gantz, 2013), among others, illustrate the considerable consequences imposed by regulators (Durão & Junior, 2016; Coin, 2020). On top of this, neglect on part of an auditor to report wrongdoing by peers can yield opportunities for accounting manipulation and fraud (Condé, 2013). Despite only limited research being available, findings have suggested that auditors tend to be reluctant to speak out against peers (Kaplan, 1995; Kaplan & Whitecotton, 2001). Regarding the Brazilian context specifically, Fonseca (2020) found that 46% of professionals either have taken part in irregularities or have abstained from reporting peers who have, while 48% would manipulate, or look the other way on manipulation by others, in financial reporting on personal benefits paid for by the company.

Individual factors such as the auditor’s relationship with the client or peers (i.e., locus of commitment) (Kaplan & Whitecotton, 2001), personal stance on ethical matters (i.e., ethical style) (Curtis & Taylor, 2009), age (Mansor et al., 2020), gender (Seifer et al., 2010) and work experience (Mansor et al., 2020) influence the decision to report wrongdoing. Taking these as its base, this study seeks to broach the following problem: What is the influence of individual characteristics on the will to report peers in inherently high-risk situations? Toward that aim, we seek to build an understanding of which specific traits bear on the decision to whistleblow among auditing professionals in Brazil. From this, the goal of the study emerges: To identify the influence of individual characteristics on the will to report peers in inherently high-risk situations.

This study contributes to the literature in various ways. Firstly, greater understanding on the concept of whistleblowing in independent auditing has direct implications for the profession, as it addresses a widespread ethical dilemma in the profession, one which is understood to be fundamental to the purposes it serves. Findings obtained build on those from Silva and Souza (2017) in terms of the availability and nature of reporting channels. Additionally, this study contributes to the growing body of knowledge concerning Brazil specifically, particularly as it assesses the characteristics of individuals working in the profession in the country, including ethical style, gender, and social desirability bias. Lastly, our results contribute to the evolution of “Whistleblower theory” in terms of decision-making around reporting depending on the personal characteristics of the whistleblower (Curtis and Taylor, 2009).

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Auditor independence and whistleblowing

The external audit profession serves as a tool for validating financial reporting produced by organizations, casting light on their economic and financial health, as well as a means for preventing material distortions and fraud in the process (Batista et al., 2014). In this sense, though the primary goal of the audit is not to combat fraud directly, when procedures applied result in an assessment of the strength of internal controls, they serve as a preventative measure against error and fraud (Cunha & Beuren, 2004).

Over the course of the engagement, the auditor must maintain impartiality in fact, alongside in appearance, by way of a strictly professional, independent, and balanced relationship with the client (Franco & Reis, 2004). Auditor independence is a critical component of the credibility and reliability of the results obtained in fieldwork (Morás et al., 2019), and professional skepticism is central to inquisitive mindset necessary for the right questions to be asked, a critical-thinking approach to findings, and the constant awareness of the possibility of misstatements due to fraud or error.

When auditor independence is impaired, so, too, is the product of the engagement. The opinion included in the auditor’s report may lose credibility and reliability, on part of users of the financial statements, leaving the supposed impartiality of the findings at odds with the means under which they were obtained. There is a substantial body of cases in which the loss of audit firm independence resulted in legal action and the imposition of penalties. In 2016, Deloitte was fined $8M by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) stemming from misstatements on the balance sheet of Gol S.A. (Durão & Junior, 2016). PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) was subject to penalties of $7.9M following accusations of inadequate professional conduct and violations of auditor independence rules (Coin, 2020). Once more, in 2020, Deloitte was fined $19.42M by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) for not acting with due integrity, objectivity, or professional skepticism while engaged to provide attestation services for the firm Autonomy (Kinder, 2020).

Toward that end, Brazilian Accounting Rules PA (R2) and PG 100 (R1) aid practitioners in defining the achievement and maintenance of auditor independence (Morás et al., 2019). Similar concepts are outlined in Big Four firms’ codes of conduct, for example, PWC (2017, p. 9) includes “we recognize that independence, including the appearance of independence, is the core of objectivity”, while Deloitte (2020, p. 32) states that “all professionals at the firm must act with absolute independence in client matters, avoiding situations that, in the eyes of third parties, might be perceived as a threat to independence on part of staff or the firm”.

In light of this, the loss of auditor independence due to diminished internal controls, procedures and policies, along with risk management, together contribute to an environment susceptible to fraud and unethical behavior (Moura, 2007). With this in mind, it is necessary to implement preventative measures within audit firms, as well.

From an auditing perspective, “Big Four” companies each have their own internal reporting channels: PWC’s “Ethics Channel”, KPMG’s “International Hotline”, EY’s “Direct Ethics Line”, and Deloitte’s “Reports Channel”. EY’s code of ethics states that reports can be related to illegal or unethical behavior, violations of professional rules, or inconsistencies with the firm’s code of conduct. PWC, for its part, poses the following question to define the scope of questionable events in its code of conduct: “Are you aware of unethical or illicit behavior on part of other people (for example, colleagues, clients, vendors, or others)?”

Thus, in order to anticipate individual characteristics of independent auditors that explain the will to report unethical behavior on part of their peers, the following research hypotheses are founded on a primary focus toward the locus of commitment and on ethical style.

2.2 Influence of individual characteristics hypothesis

2.2.1 Locus of commitment

The locus of commitment is directly related to the identification and involvement of the employee in the organization, the nature of his/her dedication to its beliefs, values and goals, and the will to apply greater effort in name of the organization (Taylor & Curtis, 2010).

A similar relationship exists between the locus of commitment and solidarity with coworkers, evident in feelings of loyalty or personal responsibility, and the degree to which one feels called to help others in trying situations (Curtis & Taylor, 2009). Curtis and Taylor (2010) defined the locus of commitment as the direction chosen by employees when they face a dilemma that puts the organization’s interests against those of their peers.

Under such circumstances, employees have three courses of action to choose from: (i) resign from the organization, (ii) report the incident, or (iii) keep silent (Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005). Despite this, Taylor & Curtis (2010) explain that the whistleblower must weigh the decision to point out fraud or other unethical behavior against the perceived resulting damage to the company or peer. Empirical findings from that study indicate that individuals with a stronger commitment to the company tend to show a stronger will to whistleblow against peers; however, Fajardo and Cardoso (2014) did not back those findings, having not observed a significant effect between these factors within a sample of 162 accounting professionals.

Under the assumption that auditing professionals experience a bond with the audit firm stemming from training, alignment with the ultimate goal of factual representation, and the company’s reputation, it stands to reason that they would be more inclined to report wrongdoing. Similarly, professionals with stronger ties and relationships with colleagues and their team would seem less likely to report against them. From this, the following study hypothesis was formed:

H₁: Locus of commitment toward the organization (colleague) is positively (negatively) associated with the will to report on a coworker.

2.2.2 Ethical style

Ethical style is understood as the individual’s capacity to assess ethical dilemmas and questions of morality. The literature explains that ethics influences personal decision-making, as a stronger sense of right and wrong supports individual judgment. This applies to whistleblowing in that belief in the role of reporting wrongdoing as an ethical matter leads to a greater likelihood to do so (Chiu, 2003, Curtis & Taylor, 2009).

White (2007) classifies ethical styles as either caring or judging. While caring individuals approach ethical dilemmas with the goal to reduce damage or pain caused by the situation in question, the judging style is guided by rules, objectivity, and consistency, leading to a stronger likelihood to report wrongdoing. Curtis and Taylor (2009) presented empirical evidence illustrating the positive association between ethical style and the will to blow the whistle among a sample of 122 American auditing professionals. In fact, the AICPA code of ethics prohibits auditors acting in the public interest from considering employment opportunities at a client during the term of the engagement, in order to minimize concerns on part of the users of the financial statements that independence may be impaired, whether in fact or appearance (Kaplan & Whitecotton, 2001).

Further, Sampaio and Sobral (2013) explained that ethical judgement on matters just as wrongdoing can lead an individual to adopt a more favorable attitude toward reporting unethical conduct. In this way, auditors possessing a judging ethical style that view a given situation as unethical will be more likely to report potentially unethical behavior than those leaning more toward the caring end. From this, the second research hypothesis was developed.

H₂: Judging ethical style (caring) is positively (negatively) associated with the auditor will to report wrongdoing on part of colleagues.

3 METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES

3.1 Research instrument and variables

Data collection was carried out via a survey instrument in questionnaire format, applied to professionals working at a Big Four firm in October of 2020. This was done online, using Google Forms, with the link shared with the firm over email.

Firstly, the study instrument provides participants with the consent form. Following this, participants were presented with a hypothetical situation adapted from Kaplan and Whitecotton (2001), which has been validated and approved by the Talent and Risk departments of the Big Four firm. The case deals with an auditor (Pedro) who receives an offer for employment at a client (Master Tec S/A) and is weighing the options of accepting it or remaining in his current role. This dilemma is seen through the eyes of a colleague (Miguel). The situation is characterized by inherently high risk, in accordance with Kaplan and Whitecotton (2001), given the presence of material misstatements, deficiencies in internal controls, and aggressive accounting policies. Later, the instrument applies questions designed to verify participant attention to the facts of the case, such as (i) What is the name of the audit client and (ii) To which auditor was the employment offer extended?

Subsequently, participants responded on a scale of 1 to 7, (iii) What is the probability of Miguel reporting to his superior that Pedro has a job offer from Empresa Master Tec S/A? This question was posed in the third person with the goal of reducing social desirability bias, found to be common in this type of study (Robinson et al., 2012; Berger et al., 2017). Additionally, the instrument contained a group of questions designed to construct a participant profile based on individual traits of interest, namely, the locus of commitment (Lcomp) and ethical style (Ethic) (Table 1).

Table 1

Study variables

Locus of Commitment (Lcomp) was measured with a research instrument consisting of three questions, with possible responses from 1 to 5, with lower values indicating a stronger commitment to peers, while higher ones, to the firm. The variable Ethic was assessed by way of an eight-question instrument adapted from Curtis & Taylor (2009), with higher values indicating a judging style and lower numbers pointing to a caring style.

Lastly, given the goal of defining the participant profile, demographic data including age, gender, education level, work experience, rank, auditor (or not), and the incidence of unethical or questionable behavior was collected.

3.2 Participant selection

The study sample consisted of a group of Big Four auditors. The research instrument gained response from 91 participants. Six respondents failed to provide satisfactory responses on attendance in the online survey and were thus omitted from the sample. Attendance questions are key when applying online surveys, given the risk of participant distraction during the application of the questionnaire or the possibility that key details of the case were not retained.

The composition of the final sample, following the exclusion of participants that failed the attention requirement, was 85 auditing professionals. This was assessed with a confidence level of 95% and observed sampling error of 10%. The number of respondents, sampling error, and margin of error are consistent with related previous studies (Kaplan & Whitecotton, 2001; Curtis & Taylor, 2009; Faro et al., 2010).

3.3 Research method

Initial analysis was performed through descriptive statistics and, subsequently, Spearman correlation analysis and covariance analysis (ANCOVA) were applied, as well. ANCOVA can be understand as an extension of variance analysis (ANOVA), characterized by the inclusion of independent quantitative variables (covariables). For its part, ANCOVA requires the same assumptions as ANOVA, such as normality of residuals and homogeneity in variance (Cohen, 2013).

Additionally, the robustness test involved in the tobit regression model, alternately known as the censored regression model utilizing the Maximum Likelihood Estimation, following the classical linear model hypothesis -alternatively, the normal distribution model, homoscedastic, with a conditional linear average (Gujarati & Porter, 2011).

4 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

4.1 Descriptive analysis

Table 2 presents a set of individual characteristics that illustrate the participant profile.

Table 2

Demographic information

These findings suggest participants were, on average, 26 years old, with a standard deviation of 3.38 years. The sample was 56.04% male, which contrasts with previous studies on the profession that have observed an even stronger majority of men (Morás, et al., 2019; Degenhart & Cunha, 2020). All participants had a minimum education level of high school, while a narrow majority (54.95%) had completed an undergraduate degree. A balanced distribution across ranks (Level) was observed, with the greatest concentration in at the associate level (31.87%). In total, 86 of the participants surveyed (94.51%) are auditors and they have, on average, 36 months of experience in the field.

Responses concerning having witnessed unethical or questionable circumstances were near-even in responses, with 46 participants (50.55%) replying in the affirmative and 45 (49.45%) not having experienced these. In other words, approximately half of the auditing professionals surveyed have witnessed questionable actions or situations considered unethical in the past.

4.2 Statistical analyses

Table 3 displays descriptive statistics observed between study variables applied to the ANCOVA and the mean, standard deviation, and minimum/maximum values observed.

Table 3

Descriptive statistics

The dependent variable Report returned an average of 4.95, with standard deviation of 1.55, which suggests the auditors are more likely to report than not, this being the key focus of the hypothetical scenario in play. The variable Lcomp showed an average of 10.27, standard deviation 2.72, ranging from 3 to 15. From this, we gather that, on average, the participants display a stronger commitment to the firm than to their peers. The variable Ethic, at an average if 5.94 and standard deviation of 1.27, ranged from 2 to 8, suggesting an ethical style leaning more toward judging than caring. It merits note that the judging style is in many ways fundamental to carrying out the audit profession, given its strong emphasis on rules, objectivity, and consistency in decision-making.

Table 4 presents the Spearman correlation values obtained, followed by the statistical significance of the study variables in terms of ANCOVA modeling and tobit regression methods.

Table 4

Spearman correlation

These findings indicate that the will to report is positively correlated with the locus of commitment, ethical style, and gender. Alternatively, it is negatively correlated with age and experience. It merits mention that, in order to carry out the ANCOVA model, an assumption exists that the linearity between covariables and highly correlated variables (above 0.80) can impede greater precision in estimating model parameters (Gujarati & Porter, 2011). Results obtained from Spearman correlation testing suggest a strong relationship between the variables age and experience (0.743), which may indicate multicollinearity.

From there, ANCOVA analysis was applied, in order to identify the effects of individual characteristics on the will to report peer auditors under conditions of inherently high risk. Table 5 displays the results of the ANCOVA model, which included the variables of interest Lcomp and Ethic along with the control variables, Age, Gender and Exp.

Table 5

ANCOVA model

*** p < 0.01;** p < 0.05;* p < 0.10, respectively.

These findings indicate that the variable Lcomp did not bear statistical significance. As a result, the study’s H1 was not confirmed. In contrast, the variable Ethic presented a positive, statistically significant association (F(1, 84) = 3.96, p < 0.050), thus confirming H2. This result suggests that a stronger tendency toward a judging ethical study yields a greater will to report, under the circumstances of the hypothetical scenario in play. Further, this corroborates and reinforces the findings of Curtis and Taylor (2009), which found statistically significant results at only the 10% confidence level.

The variable Gender showed a positive and statistically significant association (F(1, 84) = 2.99, p < 0.088), which can be interpreted as a greater likelihood to report among women than men. This finding conflicts with those from Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005), while corroborating Seifert et al. (2010). Similarly, Taylor and Curtis (2013) explained that gender may lead to these types of differences, as women tend to be more sensitive to challenging ethical situations than male counterparts.

Results were assessed with the dependent variable in the first person, which did not return significant results. Additionally, Robinson et al. (2012) suggested combining dependent variables in third and first person based on the average. Upon applying this approach, the model’s variables still did not prove significant.

Lastly, it merits mention that the results obtained were tested excluding the Experience (Exp) variable in light of its strong correlation with Age. That being said, the statistical significance of the variables Ethic and Gender was not impeded. Thus, the study results remain robust despite the presence of multicollinearity indicators.

4.3 Robustness test

Table 6 displays the results of the estimated model by way of tobit regression, in order to carry out the robustness test.

Table 6

Results of tobit regression model

*** p < 0.01;** p < 0.05;* p < 0.10, respectively.

These findings indicate that the variable Ethic (β = 0.374, p < 0.033) is significantly and positively associated with auditor willingness to report on coworkers. Similarly, the variable Gender (β = 0.783, p < 0.079) is significantly and positively associated with auditor intention. These findings confirm the research hypothesis H2.

Further, the tobit model applied to the dependent variable Report as measured in the first person did not return a significant association between the independent and dependent variables analyzed. However, when taking the approach of Robinson et al. (2012), blending the first- and third-person dependent variable based on average, a statistically significant, positive association emerged for the variable Ethic (β = 0.234, p < 0.097) alone.

5 DISCUSSION

The results outlined above indicate that the will to whistleblow on part of auditors is significantly and positively associated with ethical style. This was evidenced by both ANCOVA modeling and robustness testing under the tobit regression model, both when assessing intentions from the third-person point of view. These results confirmed the study’s H2, implying that in situations of inherently high risk, personal traits concerning ethics have direct bearing on the decision to report on peers. This underscores the importance of a better understanding on intentions when applied to sensitive situations, including relationships with one’s employer and peers, as well as the nature of the auditing profession and its proximity to clients. This has practical implications, given the tendency of auditors to leave their firms in favor of more balanced schedules or competitive pay in the industry setting. On the other hand, the technical knowledge gained through auditing experience make practitioners desirable to the private sector. This, given the value of in-depth experience with accounting standards under CPC, IFRS, and FASB, tax regulation and risk management, and soft skills including teamwork and project management, all of which are present in seasoned auditing professionals.

Further, the study obtained findings concerning the variable Gender that suggest a significant, positive association between it and the will to report wrongdoing. Analysis indicated that women are more likely to report on their peers, which stands to contribute to the literature on gender and its effect on matters within the profession. In particular, among the famous whistleblowers featured on the cover of Time, Cynthia Cooper, prior to overseeing internal auditing at Enron, worked at two Big Four firms. Additionally, these findings have bearing on the lack of consensus in the existing literature (Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005; Seifert et al., 2010). As a possible explanation, Hoffman (1998) pointed out that women have been observed to behave more ethically in certain situations, for example, in the case of potential firing due to political lobbying done to save the company from non-compliance issues or taking a managerial position in a company knowing its product is hazardous to the health of its users.

Lastly, differences observed in the results concerning the dependent variable as measured in the first and third person highlight the need for further studies in the Brazilian context that could provide additional insight into social desirability bias and its influence on whistleblower decision-making. It merits mention that various studies on ethical behavior make use of hypothetical scenarios and, with that in mind, future studies must control for the effect of the same. Along these lines, the unmitigated effect of social desirability on studies utilizing scenarios and ethical dilemmas (for example, whistleblowing) could lead to problems in terms of both internal validity and the reliability of results, thus compromising the value of findings obtained.

6 CONCLUSIONS

This study identified individual characteristics that affected the will, on part of auditors, to report on peers when they receive employment offers from clients possessing internal controls deficiencies and aggressive accounting policies. Toward that aim, the study carried out a survey of 85 professionals at a Big Four firm, who first completed a consent form and then provided responses concerning a hypothetical situation in which a colleague had received an offer from a client. This assessed independent variables based on personal traits.

Initially, the results of descriptive analysis indicated that the participants, on average, feel greater commitment to the company than to their colleagues. This may be a reflection of organizational culture, reputation, or training efforts on part of Big Four firms (Marques et al., 2018; Degenhart & Cunha, 2020). Nevertheless, statistical modeling showed that this individual trait did not significantly affect the decision to blow the whistle on a peer. Another finding highlighted that the judging ethical style is more likely to report on goings-on in the auditing environment than the caring type. From this, the judging profile supports the key functions of the audit role, supporting objectivity and professional skepticism congruent with applicable professional standards. This ties in with Morás et al. (2019), which posited that consistent application of independence in the day-to-day of auditing requires that practitioners be objective and impartial in their actions and assessments.

Further, this study gathered evidence on the phenomenon of whistleblowing within the auditing profession and provided findings to strengthen company policies and professional development, particularly within the realm of policy set in codes of conduct and ethics across client engagements. Managers can employ hypothetical scenarios such as the one applied in our survey to illustrate unethical situations, providing direction on appropriate actions to be taken, as well as educate on the importance of reporting channels and emphasize the importance of non-retaliation.

Naturally, the study was limited by several factors. The sample was composed of 85 responses from professionals working in Big Four firms. Further studies might utilize social networks (e.g., LinkedIn) to obtain greater response rates. That said, the need to guarantee confidentiality and anonymity in participant response remains a factor meriting consideration. Similarly, results obtained are limited to the specific hypothetical scenario outlined in the study; in order to augment external validity, these circumstances might not be applied to all audit firms. Lastly, the research instrument was limited in its assessment of participant intentions, in place of action taken substantiating those aims.

REFERENCES

Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2020). Report to the Nations: The 2020 Report to the Nations. https://acfepublic.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/2020-Report-to-the-Nations.pdf.

Batista, A. A. R., Lima, K. R., da Silveira, T. R., & Barbosa, W. H. (2014). A importância da auditoria para a prevenção de erros e fraudes na organização. Diálogos em Contabilidade: Teoria e Prática, 2(1), 1-21.

Berger, L., Perreault, S., & Wainberg, J. (2017). Hijacking the moral imperative: How financial incentives can discourage whistleblower reporting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-51663

Chiu, R. K. (2003). Ethical judgment and whistleblowing intention: Examining the moderating role of lócus of control. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(1), 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022911215204

Coin, B. N. (2020). SEC multou cerca de 20 grandes organizações em 2019. Money Times. https://www.moneytimes.com.br/sec-multou-cerca-de-20-grandes-organizacoes-em-2019/.

Cohen, B. H. (2013). Explaining psychological statistics. John Wiley & Sons.

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. (2019). NBC PG 100 (R1), DE 21 DE NOVEMBRO DE 2019 Dá nova redação à NBC PG 100, que dispõe sobre o cumprimento do código, dos princípios fundamentais e da estrutura conceitual. https://www1.cfc.org.br/sisweb/SRE/docs/NBCPG100(R1).pdf

Conselho Federal de Contabilidade. NBC PA 290 (R2) - Independência - Trabalhos de Auditoria e Revisão. http://www1.cfc.org.br/sisweb/SRE/docs/NBCPA290(R2).pdf.

Condé, R. A. D. (2013). Fraudes corporativas: um estudo de casos múltiplos à luz da teoria dos escândalos corporativos. http://bdtd.ibict.br/vufind/Record/UERJ_2eebe027daa427f769a0f33f0ac049c0.

Cunha, P. R. D., & Beuren, I. M. (2006). Técnicas de amostragem utilizadas nas empresas de auditoria independente estabelecidas em Santa Catarina. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 17(40), 67-86. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-70772006000100006

Curtis, M. B., & Taylor, E. Z. (2009). Whistleblowing in public accounting: Influence of identity disclosure, situational context, and personal characteristics. Accounting and the Public Interest, 9(1), 191-220. https://doi.org/10.2308/api.2009.9.1.191

Dalton, D., & Radtke, R. R. (2013). The joint effects of Machiavellianism and ethical environment on whistle-blowing. Journal of business ethics, 117(1), 153-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1517-x

Degenhart, L., & da Cunha, P. R. (2020). Influência do Comportamento do Líder no Desempenho da Equipe de Auditoria. Revista de Auditoria, Governança e Contabilidade - RAGC, 8(33), 98-116.

Deloitte. (2020). Código de Ética e Conduta da Deloitte Brasil. https://www2.deloitte.com/br/pt/pages/about-deloitte/articles/etica-integridade-deloitte-brasil.html

Durão, M., & Junior, A. S. (2016) Deloitte Brasil paga multa recorde nos EUA por fraude ao auditar balanços. Estadão. https://economia.estadao.com.br/noticias/negocios,deloitte-brasil-paga-multa-recorde-nos-eua-por-fraude-ao-auditar-balancos,10000092773.

Fajardo, B. D. A., & Cardoso, R. L. (2014). Do as I Say, Don't Do as I Do: How Individual and Relational Characteristics Influence Whistleblowing. Contabilidade Gestão e Governança, 17(1), 115-133.

Faro, E. S. D. C., Amorim, M. C. S., Trevisan, L., & Junqueira, L. A. P. (2010). Âncoras de carreira e transformações no modelo de administração: estudo de caso do Tribunal de Contas da União (TCU). Cadernos EBAPE. BR, 8(4), 710-733. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1679-39512010000400010

Fonseca, A. (2020). Brasileiros tendem a aceitar ações antiéticas. Valor Econômico. https://valor.globo.com/carreira/noticia/2020/01/06/brasileiros-tendem-a-aceitar-acoes-antieticas.ghtml.

Franco, A. A. D., & Reis, J. A. G. (2004). O papel da auditoria interna nas empresas. http://www.inicepg.univap.br/cd/INIC_2004/trabalhos/inic/pdf/IC6-106.pdf.

Gantz, S. D. (2013). The basics of IT audit: purposes, processes, and practical information. Elsevier.

Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2011). Econometria básica. Amgh Editora.

Hoffman, J. J. (1998). Are women really more ethical than men? Maybe it depends on the situation. Journal of Managerial Issues, 10(1), 60-73. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40604182

Kaplan, S. E. (1995). An examination of auditors' reporting intentions upon discovery of procedures prematurely signed-off. Auditing, 14(2), 90.

Kaplan, S. E., & Whitecotton, S. M. (2001). An examination of auditors' reporting intentions when another auditor is offered client employment. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 20(1), 45-63. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2001.20.1.45

Kinder, T. (2020). Deloitte terá de pagar multa recorde na Europa por 'grave delito' na auditoria da Autonomy. Valor Econômico. https://valor.globo.com/empresas/noticia/2020/09/18/deloitte-tera-de-pagar-multa-recorde-na-europa-por-grave-delito-na-auditoria-da-autonomy.ghtml.

Latan, H., Jabbour, C. J. C., & Jabbour, A. B. L. S. (2019). ‘Whistleblowing triangle’: Framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Business Ethics, 160(1), 189-204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3862-x

Mansor, T. M. T., Ariff, A. M., & Hashim, H. A. (2020). Whistleblowing by auditors: the role of professional commitment and independence commitment. Managerial Auditing Journal, 35(8), 1033-1055. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-11-2019-2484

Marques, V. A., Louzada, L. C., Amaral, H. F., & de Souza, A. A. (2018). O poder da reputação: evidências do efeito big four sobre a opinião do auditor. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade, 15(35), 3-31. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8069.2018v15n35p3

Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Whistleblowing in organizations: An examination of correlates of whistleblowing intentions, actions, and retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 277-297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-0849-1

Morás, V. R., de Souza, T. R., & da Cunha, P. R. (2019). Ameaças à independência do auditor: uma análise a partir da percepção de auditores independentes em consonância a NBC PA 290. Contabilidade Vista & Revista, 30(3), 46-72. https://doi.org/10.22561/cvr.v30i3.4885

Moura, D. (2007). Análise dos fatores de convencimento do juízo brasileiro quanto à ocorrência de fraude contábil: um estudo de caso múltiplo da gallus, da encol e do banco santos. https://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/4038/pronto.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2017). Código de Conduta da PWC. https://www.pwc.com.br/pt/quem-somos/canal-de-etica.html

Robinson, S. N., Robertson, J. C., & Curtis, M. B. (2012). The effects of contextual and wrongdoing attributes on organizational employees’ whistleblowing intentions following fraud. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(2), 213-227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0990-y

Sampaio, D. B. D., & Sobral, F. (2013). Speak now or forever hold your peace?: An essay on whistleblowing and its interfaces with the Brazilian culture. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 10(4), 370-388. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-76922013000400002

Seifert, D. L., Sweeney, J. T., Joireman, J., & Thornton, J. M. (2010). The influence of organizational justice on accountant whistleblowing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(7), 707-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2010.09.002

Silva, G. R., & de Sousa, R. G. (2017). A influência do canal de denúncia anônima na detecção de fraudes contábeis em organizações. Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações, 11(30), 46-56. https://doi.org/10.11606/rco.v11i30.134372

Sousa, R. G., Vasconcelos, A. F., Antunes, G. A., & da Silva, J. D. G. (2013). Fraudes contábeis e whistleblowing: uma pesquisa empírica sobre a influência da percepção contábil do delatante. Revista Universo Contábil, 9(3), 128-142. DOI:10.4270/RUC.2013325

Taylor, E. Z., & Curtis, M. B. (2010). An examination of the layers of workplace influences in ethical judgments: Whistleblowing likelihood and perseverance in public accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(1), 21-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0179-9

Vieira, E. R. F. D. C., de Melo, C. L. L., Lustosa, P. R. B., & Silva, C. A. T. (2015). Ética: a tendência de os profissionais contábeis denunciarem atos questionáveis. Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações, 9(24), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.11606/rco.v9i24.55421

White, T. I. 2007. Discovering Philosophy. 2nd edition. Pearson Prentice Hall.

Notes

Author notes

Corresponding author: Tel. +55 (21) 3938-5106 E-mail: lucasmaragno@facc.ufrj.br (L. M. D. Maragno); nadieli.cordeiro@hotmail.com (N. Cordeiro) Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Av. Pasteur, 250 - Urca, Rio de Janeiro - RJ, 22290-240, Brazil