Excellent post. I agree with the notion of Phar-Mor financially shooting itself in the foot by marketing a commitment to offering the lowest prices of any drug or convenience store while trying to become a larger company. Early in its expansion, Phar-Mor ran into an obstacle in which raising prices became an economic necessity in order to stay competitive but compromised for the unexpected losses by committing fraud at Monus's discretion. I also liked the distinction you provided about how the fraud may or may not have escalated further had Finn not followed through with Monus's expense manipulation. However, Finn was not hired into Phar-Mor with so little accounting experience that he could not have at least tried arguing against Monus's proposed expense manipulation, as evidenced by the credential of certified public accountant (CPA to Finn's name). Although Finn claimed early on the documentary that he tended to view the world in terms of black and white and right and wrong, his decision to listen to Monus suggests otherwise. Rather it implied that Finn was in reality less skeptical than he himself believed, and less capable of taking a stand against what he knew full well to be ethically wrong. I attributed this lack of professional skepticism and inability to handle ethical dilemmas to educator failures, since a college accounting curriculum is supposed to equip graduates with the analytical skills and basic knowledge of fraud needed for them to handle themselves better in the real world than Finn did (Albrecht et al., 2019, pg. 353-354).

what will be the positive response to this answers.

please give explanation with key references