Consider the case of Arthur Andersen

453 Words2 Pages
Consider the case of Arthur Andersen as described in the book Final Accounting. How did leadership, culture, and conflict contribute to the firm’s collapse? What are the lessons from this case for you? Answer: In the 1990s, the firm embarked on a path that valued hefty fees ahead of bluntly honest bookkeeping, eroding Andersen's good name. Andersen shunted aside accountants who failed to adapt to the firm's new direction. In their place, Andersen promoted a slicker breed who could turn modestly profitable auditing assignments into consulting gold mines. Repeatedly, Andersen rewarded those involved with the firm's most troubled clients, while guardians of the company's legacy were shown the door. The quiet dilution of standards and the rise of auditor-salesmen at Andersen are central to the scandals that have cost investors billions of dollars. Even though the leaders contended that conflicts between its auditing and consulting missions had no impact on the quality of its work but actually they do. The two roles rarely mix well--a fact Arthur Andersen himself warned about as far back as the Great Depression. The culture changed where the auditor was no longer the guy people respected in the '80s and '90s. Even as many of its partners and staff continued to uphold a high standard, others compromised in the interest of generating fees. Andersen's remaining leadership disputed that the firm emphasized the selling of services over audit quality, replacing partners who were strong auditors but didn't generate enough revenue. By 1994, two-thirds of Andersen's revenue came from the consulting side. Coinciding with that shift, the influence of the firm's in-house ethics watchdog dimmed. Inside Andersen, the pragmatists carried the day. Partners throughout the sprawling Andersen Empire could see changes coming. Each office was expected to meet higher revenue goals.

More about Consider the case of Arthur Andersen

Open Document