Abstract
Over the past ten years, public trust in the accounting profession has been diminished due to financial scandals brought on by poor decision making, dishonesty and a move away from morals, values, and ethics. With the perception of accounting at an all-time low, there is a need to reinvent the profession. The following pages of this research paper will examine the Model of Organizational Trust, and its three elements of ability, benevolence, and integrity. The three elements will be defined and explained using support from peer-reviewed articles. The report will also discuss the ways in which the elements are incorporated in the AICPA’s Code of Professional Conduct. The elements will be examined to learn the ways in which they help to promote trust in the accounting profession and finally, suggestions will be proposed to help improve public trust in the accounting profession.

Introduction An essential component every profession must possess in order to garner satisfaction and commitment from clients and customers is trust. Trust cannot be gained quickly; it is developed over time through interactions, observations, and an understanding of another’s beliefs and values (Mayer, Davis, Schoorman, 1995). However, a person’s stated beliefs do not often dictate their behavior. In pursuit of professional goals, individuals often set aside what they know to be right and act in a manner that benefits them either financially, with recognition, or in some other manner (Six & Sorge, 2008). Over the past decade, the accounting profession has seen an erosion of public trust. Numerous financial scandals have brought heavy regulation and burdensome laws to which companies and accountants must comply, these scandals have done much to damage the superior reputation the profession once enjoyed and has also led to the demise of the world’s largest accounting firm (Wilkerson, 2010). In the midst of a public distrust is the opportunity to rebuild the profession’s reputation. The Model of Organizational Trust developed by Mayer et al. (1995) is one avenue on which the accounting profession may travel to regain public trust. The model identifies ability, benevolence, and integrity as elements that contribute to the trustworthiness of a person or for the purpose of this report, a profession (Mayer et al., 1995). Although somewhat forgotten over the years, these elements have long been a part of the culture of accounting and each has been incorporated in the Code of Professional Conduct by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) to aid in ethical decision making. Public trust in business is at an all-time low and regaining this trust should be on the forefront of the accounting profession (Harris & Wicks, 2010). The Model of Trust is a tool that can accomplish this goal. Real, long term change must be more than just learning to follow rules or complying with regulations. The three elements of the model all lead to a professional accountant developing stronger decision making abilities and stronger professional judgment. The future of the accounting profession is up to the profession itself. Development of this final and fourth element is what will restore the reputation the profession once enjoyed.
Ability
Accountants at some point in their career will find themselves having to make a decision on whether a situation they are faced with is ethical or not. Professional ethics is an important aspect of an accountant's job. As an accountant, one has the commitment to each client to demonstrate various levels of characteristics, such as competency. Competence, or ability, is when someone must show a level of professionalism that also relates to “that group of skills, competencies, and characteristics that enable a party to have influence within some specific domain (Sullivan, 2010). An accountant’s ability plays a part in maintaining and enhancing public trust in the accounting profession. The ability or competence of an accountant is also a major part of trust characteristics in the ethical decision making model. Accountants are known and respected for their honesty through displaying integrity and competence in their work. Personal competence and professional judgment are, perhaps, the most important factors in ensuring the integrity of financial information. Professional judgment is important because accounting information is often based on inexact measurements and assumptions are required. Standards and principles can provide instructions for how accountants operate, but at some point, accountants have to use their ability to make a professional judgment. Because accountants are known and respected for their honesty, it is important for all accountants and their firms to show and practice good ethics. Ethical and professional responsibility is something that should show and be taken seriously. An accountant could discover something a firm or another employee is doing ethically wrong. For example, an accountant can work for a firm and discover a co-worker is withholding money from the firm. When faced with this type of situation, an accountant should try and follow their firm's polices to resolve the issue. If the firm does not have a policy in place, the situation should be discussed with a supervisor or the next level of management. Ability, which is known as due care and professional competence in the AICPA Professional Code of Conduct, stresses the fact that CPAs should “observe the profession’s technical and ethical standards, and strive continually to improve competence” (AICPA, 2010, para 1). The Professional Competence and Due Care principle means that an accountant must have the knowledge to perform professional service to all clients and be in accordance with applicable technical and professional standards, therefore maintaining fairness to clients. Being confidential with information given and discussed, and upholding professional behavior at all times also maintains justice and fairness with all clients. It is crucial that a professional accountant should follow the fundamental principles and general moral principles found within the code of ethics to make the right decision or judgment for clients. The code of ethics exists and was written to serve as the guideline for determining appropriate ethical behavior. Ability is imperative to maintaining and enhancing public trustworthiness. All three characteristics, as a group are imperative in developing and maintaining trust. Just as perceptions about an individual’s ability will have an impact on how much trust the individual can acquire, these perceptions also affect the extent to which an organization will be trusted. Ability is the forerunner of trust, along with benevolence and integrity. If the person giving their trust does not perceive the ability or any of the trust characteristics of an accountant to be sufficient, they may not think of them as trustworthy. Accountants need to possess a high level of ability, along with benevolence, and integrity to successfully develop and enhance public trust.
Benevolence
Benevolence is only one of three elements that help an individual determine the trustworthiness of an organization (Mayer et al., 1995). If an individual is under the impression that a person will go out of his or her way to on behalf of the other, that person is more likely to possess trust in that other person and subsequently a positive relationship is likely to follow (Davis, Schoorman, Mayer, & Tan, 2000). Unlike ability, which is skill that enables someone to perform an action, and unlike integrity which results from the adherence to a set of rules or principles, the second element of the Model of Trust is unique in that the one demonstrating the element is acting from a desire of wanting to do something and not from pressure or the feeling of obligation. Benevolence is the goodwill of an individual that fulfills a need in his or her life. In a professional to client relationship, benevolence is considered to be the degree to which a professional goes to see the client’s interests and considerations are being satisfied, it is the effort beyond what is outlined in a formal agreement (Nguyen, 2010). The profession of accounting has always understood the importance of proper ethical behavior and more specifically benevolence, even though the last ten years has not demonstrated this. In a 2000 survey administered to employees of the Big Six public accounting firms, fifty six values and types of values were presented to audit and tax professionals to rank in order of importance. Of the values, honesty and self-respect were rated highest in terms of importance and of the value types, benevolence and achievement were ranked as most important (Akers & Giacomino, 2000). It was clear, at least back in 2000, that accountants placed a great deal of importance on achieving success through maintaining the financial well-being of an organization and welfare enhancement of others. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the demise of Arthur Andersen in 2002 made it clear that the culture of accounting had changed. A profession that once held itself to the highest standard began experiencing having its good name tarnished by accusations and convictions of which it proclaimed it was blameless (Jenkins, Deis, Bedard, & Curtis, 2008). A profession’s culture is a powerful tool, it not only gives members a sense of identity by shaping their behavior it is also what determines what decisions are made by its members (Hood, & Koberg, 1991). Describing the culture of a profession is very difficult and many authors avoid the topic. Although, some cultures are easily identifiable; a bureaucratic culture is structured, ordered, and highly regulated, and innovative culture places an emphasis on risk taking and creativity, and a supportive culture stresses family values with a high level of attention on the customer. A well rounded culture will be a combination of all these cultures (Hood, & Koberg, 1991). Creating a perception of the accounting profession as a window into the financial health of an organization is a more involved task than the mere passage of legislation. In order for the culture of the accounting profession to restore itself it must make a return to the traditional values on which a solid reputation was originally built (Melancon, 2002). The Model of Trust can aid in this process. The need for refocus on integrity and ability are obvious and are discussed in different section of this report, but the attention to benevolence is not as apparent. CPA’s, auditors, and tax professionals are trusted with valuable information, and with this trust comes a certain level of risk, risk associated with having someone outside the organization handling sensitive information and the risk of trusting that person to make decisions with that information. When a person perceives a degree of benevolence in another there is greater likelihood of risk in that relationship. In a relationship, trust leads to risk, and risk is an indicator of benevolence (Cruz, Gomez-Mejia, Becerra, 2010). Consequently, over the past decade, the public sector has experienced what happens when risk is combined with trust and benevolence is not at a level to maintain integrity. The eventual product of this type of unhealthy relationship is increased regulation, heavy fines, and public distrust. Risk is also an accurate gauge of benevolence as the intensity of its regulation is a direct reflection of the perceived benevolence of a profession (Cruz et al., 2010). The bar is set high for accountants. Being a benevolent professional accountant means that at all times you are seeking to surpass client expectations while simultaneously complying with numerous standards and generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Compliance with GAAP is of the utmost importance to an accountant, and to help with compliance the AICPA issues the Code of Professional Conduct. The code is a tool for members to aid them in ethical decision making. It speaks to a wide range of issues including benevolence (Leibowitz, & Reinstein, 2009). While the word “benevolence” does not appear in the code, the code does speak clearly that a member should be conducting him or herself in a benevolent manner. ET Section 56, Article V of the code speaks to the idea of due care. Due care is a standard that tells a person the degree of care that should be considered, or in more plain terms the amount of effort given to a responsibility. A member has an obligation to perform services to the best of his or her ability with a concern for the best interests of the client, and that the code is in agreement with the goal of benevolence; which is the preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom you have frequent contact (Doran, 2010). Section 56 of the code addresses the need for benevolent actions to help improve the perception of the accounting profession. Benevolence is made a requirement by the code in Section 56 by stating (AICPA, 2009), “The quest for excellence is the essence of due care.” The code also goes to great lengths to communicate to the member that benevolence is essential for the profession and the complete attention of the professional should be placed on the client and customer service in an attempt to satisfy client expectations.
Integrity
Integrity is defined as the quality of possessing and steadfastly adhering to high moral principles or professional standards. It is an attribute that is expected from all accountants and is supported by the underlying characteristics of the professions organizational culture and the AICPA’s Code of Professional Conduct. An evaluation of integrity as it relates to the profession’s organizational culture and the AICPA Code of Conduct will explain its significance to the profession. The underlying characteristics of the accounting profession’s organizational culture establish and influence the ethical norms and behavior shared by its members and associated groups. An ethics system is essential to the character and trustworthiness of the integrity of the profession and its discipline. The most appropriate type of ethics system for the profession is a deontological or duty centered system where the rule determines the result, is the basis of the act, is good regardless of the result and the result is continuously calculated within the rule (Geisler, 2010; Riahi-Belkaoui, 1992). Integrity is a trait all accountants are expected to exhibit and carry, both internally and externally in performing all their duties and responsibilities. Robertson and Louwers (2002) emphasize that “the individual integrity of each accountant is mandatory in performing duty.” The mandatory duty of integrity is one characteristic of the organizational culture that suitably relates with the deontological ethics system advocated for the accounting profession. A deontological view of ethics and the underlying characteristic trait of integrity are supported by and consistent with the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The code emphasizes the obligation or duty of accounting professionals to serve the public interest which requires integrity (AICPA, 2010). It further emphasizes that an individual’s duty is to comply with the norms and standards of the profession which includes the compulsion to act with integrity. The significance of integrity is evident in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. Professional integrity occurs when one’s actions are consistent and in accordance with the profession’s moral norms. A professions’ code of ethics serves as a guide that directs the behavior and actions its members, and profession as a whole honor. The AICPA Code of Conduct defines the rules and principles that govern the accounting profession. Building trust requires one to behave and act sincerely and honestly. Integrity has been identified as one of the three fundamental characteristics outlined in the model of trust (Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995). It is a highly respected characteristic of the accounting profession by which its members are obligated to act and behave with when carrying out their professional responsibilities (Robertson et al., 2002). Following principles and rules exhibits integrity because others can judge their own opinion of the rules and principles another party practices. Frankel (1989) states that society, “has every right to evaluate professional performance in the light of a moral as well as a technical dimension.” Mayer et al. (1995) explains that there is a relationship between integrity and trust in which a trustor observes that a trustee complies with rules and principles that the trustor can appreciate. Just as public trust is an integral part of the AICPA, so too is integrity. The AICPA Code of Professional Conduct is a set of standards, rules and values that govern and guide ethical decisions and actions made by accounting professionals. Successful accounting professionals accept these principles and rules as the moral norms by which they practice the profession (Epstein & Spalding, 1993). The principles consist of a preamble followed by several articles. The second article discusses public interest and how it relates to the profession. It states that members should accept the obligation to act in a way that will serve the public interest, honor the public trust, and demonstrate commitment to professionalism (AICPA, 2010). Accepting liability to the public is considered a “distinguishing mark” of the trade. The public refers to anyone who depends on the objectivity and integrity of an accountant in conducting commerce. This can include clients, credit grantors, governments, employers, investors and the business community. It is believed that the public’s interests are best served when members act with integrity in fulfilling their responsibilities, especially when faced with conflicting pressures between the various public groups previously mentioned. Members are expected to act with integrity, objectivity, due professional care and basically have a genuine desire to serve the public. They are expected to act in a manner that exhibits professionalism consistent with the code through quality service, offering a variety of services and the ability to enter into fee arrangements. The third article states, “To maintain and broaden public confidence, members should perform all professional responsibilities with the highest sense of integrity” (AICPA, 2010). Integrity is valued as a fundamental characteristic to professional recognition. Essentially, integrity earns public trust and is the standard used to test all decisions (AICPA, 2010). It requires honesty and sincerity in regards to confidentiality and should not be subject to personal interest or gain. It requires accounting professionals to adhere to the form and spirit of the technical and ethical standards of the code (AICPA, 2010). Integrity is again emphasized in the rules of the AICPA Code of Conduct. Rule 102 states that in the performance of any professional service the accountant is to maintain objectivity and integrity, must be free of conflicts of interest, must not purposely misrepresent facts, and must not subordinate their judgment to others (AICPA, 2010). These requirements conferred under Rule 102 must be in fact and in appearance meaning, if a particular relationship or action could be perceived as a conflict of interest, a misrepresentation of facts or a subordination of judgment the accountant’s objectivity and integrity could be brought into question. Clearly, the significance of integrity is shown throughout the code of conduct.
Professional Judgment The definition of judgment is the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing. Professional is characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession. Thus, professional judgment is the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing while conforming to technical and ethical standards of a profession. In contrast, personal judgment is to form an opinion or evaluation by conforming to a personal value system. Professional judgment, Ketz (2004) says, lies at the heart of the accounting profession; in part because few measurements, recognitions, and aggregations of accounting data can be undertaken in an objective fashion. Accounting is essentially subjective; thus, accountants must hone their individual professional judgment to carry out their tasks. Society holds accountants responsible for their decisions, whether in their roles as corporate financial officers or as external auditors; hence they need to exercise good professional judgment so they can meet their responsibilities. Ketz states professional judgment is the interaction of education and experience. Further, Sullivan (2004) highlights the decision making characteristics of professional judgment in the accounting profession. Additionally a study by Adams et al. (1995) found CPAs used professional judgment rather than personal judgment in situations where the two conflicted (Adams, 1995; Sullivan, 2004). If professional judgment appears to be so vital to the accounting profession, the question is what happened to the organizational culture of the accounting profession for such insidious fraud to occur of the likes of Enron/Andersen, WorldCom, Global Crossings, amongst others? Organizational culture can be described as a pattern of beliefs and expectations shared by the organization’s members. These beliefs are what shape the behaviors of individuals and groups in the organization (Sullivan, 2004). The actions of those involved in the Enron/Andersen fraud, both at Enron and Arthur Andersen, were characterized by a strict rule-based ethical perspective. In the case of Enron, Satava (2006, p274) points out that “Enron’s financial staff and auditors pursued an accounting path that may have complied with a distorted manipulation of accounting rules, but clearly violated the intent of accurate and objective financial reporting.” The accounting culture, as it relates to ethical decision making, became individualistic and personal judgment based (Sullivan, 2004, pg.27). Sullivan (2004) also agreed with this view by stating that two decision making approaches to resolving ethics accounting dilemmas are personal and professional judgment. Sullivan (2010, Slide 5) lists the underlying ethical decision making characteristics inherent in the organization culture of the accounting profession. These are ethics system, ethics application perspective, moral reasoning perspective, and level of moral reasoning. The accounting profession supports a deontological ethical system, which is congruent with professional judgment. Under a deontological ethical system, actions are duty-based rather than end-based. Under Ethics Application Perspective, one’s perspective is either holistic, if based on professional judgment, or individualistic, if based on personal judgment (Sullivan, 2010, Slide 17). Because the AICPA code professes the need for professional judgment in decision making, the Code is consistent with the holistic perspective. Another characteristic of ethical decision making in the accounting profession involves making decisions from the moral reasoning perspective (Sullivan, 2010, Slide 19). The orthodox moral reasoning perspective is consistent with professional judgment in the accounting profession as there’s a higher power such as an external transcendent force. The Code is the external transcendent force that guides its’ accountant members in appropriate ethical decision making. The last characteristic of ethical decision making to be appropriate in the accounting profession is the level of moral reasoning. Sullivan shows us that the conventional level of moral reasoning is appropriate in the accounting profession because it points to an external orientation (such as the AICPA code) in which ethical decisions are made within group norms and rules of law (Sullivan, 2010, Slide 30). Contrast this with post-conventional reasoning which points to an internal orientation to make decisions (Slide 28). As highlighted above is the need for an external guide, which is much more than a set of rules, but of overarching principles. This is found in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. Article I of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct (2010) highlights the need for professional judgment in stating, “In carrying out their responsibilities as professionals, members should exercise sensitive professional and moral judgments in all their activities.” Article VI also deals with judgments in stating members “assess, in their individual judgments, whether an activity is consistent with their role as professionals.” The application of professional judgment should be utilized in context of desiring to attain the highest level of professional and moral judgments in all activities; this is especially so when ethical dilemmas exist. Nixon (1994) highlights a situation in which client confidentiality is at stake where a CPA becomes aware of a fraud at one of their clients that will affect another one of their clients. If the CPA only follows the rules, they might argue that they wouldn’t notify their other client of the fraud because of client confidentiality. However, the principles, as shown in Article II, Public Interest, tell us “in discharging their professional responsibilities, members may encounter conflicting pressures from among each of those groups. In resolving those conflicts, members should act with integrity, guided by the precept that when members fulfill their responsibility to the public, clients' and employers' interests are best served” (AICPA, 2010). In the preceding example, as the CPA acts with integrity, public trust is enhanced. It seems important that its members have an intimate knowledge of the Code. Just as it was important for studying for the CPA exam, and the required continuing education, it is very important to keep the Professional Code at the forefront of each member’s mind. Having this at the forefront of members’ minds will facilitate proper decision making. This is true not only in times when there is an obvious ethical conflict, but also in discharging day to day duties. Jackling et al. (2007) points out while codes of ethics are important, they do not guarantee the compliance of members with the code. They believe “more important is the recognition that ethics and ethical behavior is underpinned by moral reasoning” (p. 931).
Interrelationship of Trust Characteristics and the Use of Professional Judgment for Enhancing Public Trust Trust in an organizational sense can be defined as the “willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party” (Mayer et al., 1995). Public trust demands moral duty from professions because the interests and well-being of individuals is dependent on the professions’ services. Public trust is granted through society’s right to evaluate professional performance from both moral and technical aspects (Frankel, 1989). In addition, a professions’ preference for professional autonomy, meaning a publically given privilege, reinforces this moral duty. Public interest is an integral part of the AICPA Code of Conduct that emphasizes the importance of improving and sustaining the public’s trust. All three trust characteristics and the use of professional judgment, as a group are essential in developing and preserving public trust. Mayer et al. (1995) draws two major conclusions relative to the interrelatedness of the trustworthy characteristics of ability, benevolence and integrity, in addition to the use of professional judgment. First, any perception by a trustor where there is an absence of one of these three characteristics or the lack of professional judgment can undermine trust. Secondly, trustworthiness is a continuum along which these trustworthy characteristics and the use of professional judgment can vary independently. Mayer’s et al. (1995) conclusions suggest that a high degree of all three trustworthy characteristics in conjunction with the use of professional judgment will produce a high level of public trust; lesser degrees would result in lower levels of public trust. It is therefore absolutely crucial for members of the accounting profession to possess a high degree of ability, benevolence and integrity, while continuously using professional judgment when carrying out their professions duties and responsibilities. Doing so will ensure their success in enhancing and preserving public trust now and in the future.
Suggestions for Maintaining and Enhancing Public Trust The AICPA and the public have trusted the accounting profession with self-regulation since the early 1970’s. It was a requirement by the AICPA that all publicly traded companies must be peer-reviewed; this system appeared to be working as companies with positive reports retained and attracted new clients while companies receiving poor reports tended to lose clients. It wasn’t until 2002, in wake of the Enron and Arthur Andersen scandals, when Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that the profession was moved away from self-regulation and to regulation by government via the Public Company Accounting and Oversight Board (PCAOB) (Baxter, 2003). These scandals shook the public’s trust in the profession and made it clear that the process of financial reporting needed to be revamped. The road to restore public trust in the accounting profession will be long, but there are things the profession needs to implement and change if that trust is to be restored. A majority of this burden needs to be placed on the AICPA, this group needs to take the initiative and begin a discussion involving CPAs, auditors, professional accountants. This discussion should cover recent problems, perceived future problems, and key value drivers of success (Baxter, 2003). The profession should also not be silent about its recommitment to quality and integrity. Improvements and achievements should be made public; articles need to appear in professional journals and monthly magazines as well as on the internet highlighting what the profession is currently doing to improve the quality of the product being delivered to the public (2003). Excellent ratings must be earned from the PCAOB; the AICPA needs to adopt a zero-tolerance policy for acts deemed discreditable to the profession as outlined in Rule 501 of the Code of Professional Conduct (Hilary, & Lennox, 2005). There are numerous opportunities available for educational institutions to instill a sense of ethical obligation into students. Classes on ethical concepts and implementation need to be built into the accounting curriculum to give students an idea of what will be expected of them in the workplace. Fraud detection and deterrence should be taught so future CPAs will be able to identify misbehavior when they see it; this would include a basic knowledge of criminology, investigation, and laws related to fraud. Case study scenarios related to real world issues need to be developed for classroom use. These scenarios will develop a student’s communication and critical-thinking skills. Finally, since hands-on experience is the best experience, a strong internship program would be of great value to new accountants (Kranacher, 2007). Early into their careers, accountants can expect to be faced challenges that test both their knowledge and ethics; it is how young professionals react to these challenges that will determine if and when the profession will regain public trust.
Conclusion
The three trust characteristics integrated in the model of trust are imperative to maintaining and enhancing public trust in the accounting profession. The AICPA has incorporated ability, benevolence, and integrity into the Code of Professional Conduct in an effort to provide a guide for accountants to follow when performing their duties. The Code of Conduct has been modified over the years to improve the image of the accounting profession to enhance public trust. Changes taking place now and those to be made in the future by government, the profession and individual practitioners are necessary to restore public trust lost to scandal and fraud. Based on our research, accountants’ ethical behavior is required to improve and maintain public trust. Accountants should remember it is also part of their responsibility to maintain the public’s confidence and never let it be subordinated to personal gain or advantage. Without accountants following all standards and regulations set forth by the industry’s governing bodies, the accounting profession will no longer be functional or trustworthy.

References
Adams, B.L., Malone, F., James, W. (1995). Confidentiality decisions: The reasoning process of CPAs in resolving ethical dilemmas. Journal of Business Ethics, 14(12), 1015-1020.
Akers, M. D., Giacomino, D. E. (2000). Ethics and the accountants’ code of conduct. Journal of Applied Business Research, p. 87-96.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2010). Code of professional conduct. Retrieved from www.aicpa.org/about/code/index/htm.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2010). Code of professional conduct in AICPA Professional Standards, (ET 56). Retrieved from http://www.aicpa.org/Research/Standards/CodeofConduct/Pages/et_56.aspx.
Baxter, W.T. (2003). Rebuilding public trust: The future of corporate reporting. Accounting & Business Research, p. 81. Retrieved from Business Source Complete. Persistent link: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=9746813&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Cruz, C. C., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Becerra, M. (2010). Perceptions of benevolence and the design of agency contracts: CEO-TMT relationships in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, p. 69-89.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Tan, H. H. (2000). The trusted general manager and business unit performance: Empirical evidence of a competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, p. 563-576.
Doran, C. J., (2010). Fair trade consumption: In support of the out-group. Journal of Business Ethics, p. 527-541.
Epstein, M. J., & Spalding, A. D., Jr. (1993). The accountant’s guide to legal liability and ethics. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Frankel, M. S. (1989). Professional codes: Why, how and with what impact? Journal of Business Ethics, 8(2), 109-115.
Geisler, N. L. (2010). Christian ethics: Options and issues. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Harris, J. D., & Wicks, A. C. (2010). “Public trust” and trust in particular firm stakeholder interactions. Corportate Reputation Review, p. 142-154.
Hilary, Gilles, & Lennox, Clive. (2005). The Credibility of self-regulation: Evidence from the accounting profession’s peer review program. Journal of Accounting and Economics, p. 211-229. Retieved from www3.ntu.sg. Persistent link: http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/cslennox/JAE05a.pdf.
Hood, J. N., & Koberg, C. S. (1991). Accounting firm cultures and creativity among accountants. Retrieved from Business Source Complete. Persistent link: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=9604010135&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Jenkins, J. G., Deis, D. R., Bedard, J. C., & Curtis, M. B. (2008). Accounting firm culture and governance: A research synthesis. Behavioral Research in Accounting, p. 45-74.
Ketz, J. (2002, April). The accounting cycle: Wash, rinse and spin - The disintegration of professional judgment. Retrieved from http://accounting.smartpros.com/x33867.xml.
Kranacher, Mary-Jo. (2007). It’s the public trust, stupid. CPA Journal, p. 80. Retrieved from Business Source Complete. Persistent link: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=24310869&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Leibowitz, M. A., Reinstein, A. (2009) Help for solving CPA’s ethical dilemmas. Journal of Accountancy, p. 30-34.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., & Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review. 20(3), 709-734.
Nguyen, N. (2010). Competence and benevolence of contract personnel in the perceived corporate reputation: An empirical study in financial services. Corporate Reputation Review, p. 345-356.
Nixon, M. (1994). Ethical reasoning and privileged information: Resolving moral conflict. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(7), 571-577. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (1992). Morality in accounting. Westport, CT: Quorum.
Robertson J., Louwers, T. (2002). Auditing and assurance services. 10th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Satava, D., Caldwell, C., Richards, L. (2006). Ethics and the auditing culture: Rethinking the foundation of accounting and auditing. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(x), 271-284. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-0556-y.
Six, F., Arndt, S. (2008). Creating a high-trust organization: An exploration into organizational policies that stimulate interpersonal trust building. Journal of Management Studies, p. 857-884.
Sullivan, G.R. (2004). Enhancing public trust in the accounting profession using professional judgment rather than personal judgment in resolving accounting ethics dilemmas (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/fac_dis/39.
Sullivan, G.R. (2010). Accounting ethics, ethical decision making model enhancing public trust. Retrieved from http://bb7.liberty.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_1018874_1%26url%3D.
Sullivan, G.R. (2010). Organizational culture and ethics. Power Point Presentation. Retrieved from Liberty University BlackBoard, ACCT 642, Week 3, Fall 2010 D Term.
Wilkerson, J. E. (2010). Accounting educators as the accounting profession’s trustees: Lessons from a study of peer professions. Issues in Accounting Education, p. 1-13.