In your response to your peers, discuss actions and consequences that should be taken in response to a violation of their selected principle. Use the following questions to help guide your responses:

• What actions or strategies could you or others take to remediate the ethical issues?
• What are some repercussions of not abiding by your peer's selected principle from a legal, business, or general professional perspective?

Peers post

Integrity was part of the AICPA code of professional conduct that I wanted to examine. Integrity means sticking to your morals or what you believe is right even when the outcome may not be favorable. This is obviously on a sliding scale as sometimes it is straightforward to maintain your integrity, and sometimes it can be challenging; especially when you get into grey areas. However, integrity does bring a lot of value to professionals, as without it, morals would not have much meaning. Sure, we would still have morals; without integrity, there would be no reason to stick to them, and everyone would only do what benefited them the most.

I think a problematic situation involving integrity surrounding the accounting field could be the uncovering of fraud, especially if that fraud could be directly linked to someone higher than you in the cooperate structure. This places you in an awkward situation where if you bring the issue to light, there may be direct and immediate consequences for yourself. You may be labeled a "whistle-blower" and be frowned upon by other "higher-ups" who were close with the individual who was accused. This is where a sense of integrity comes into play. Do you just let it blow over and act like you did not see it, or do you let your morals guide you and point out the fraud?