Luke and Zane are two audit seniors working for the same Big Four accounting firm. Both started employment with the firm around the same time. They have mutual respect for each other; however, they have been highly competitive since they commenced work together. Luke has recently married and he and his wife are paying off their mortgage. Zane is single with a reputation in the firm for playing hard but working hard too. They have both been seniors for almost 18 months and are looking for promotion to audit supervisor. They are both aware that there is only one supervisor position available. Luke recently replaced Zane on a particular job, and the reason given to both Luke and Zane was that another assignment had arisen with a long-time client of Zane's. Once Luke had replaced Zane on that particular job, he realised that the client had called the audit manager to say that they were not impressed with Zane, as he had missed a number of issues within the audit and was arriving at work late. The audit manager had not discussed these comments with either Luke or Zane. After going through the work that Zane had completed, Luke realised that Zane had performed an excellent job, identifying a number of issues that he thought he might possibly have missed. Furthermore, Luke suspects that Zane and the client had a personality conflict, and that the client has misled the audit manager. Luke realises that he can finish off the audit, resolve the issues and obtain a good review from this assignment, which would help him in the promotion stakes. He also knows that the audit manager is unlikely to bring the client's unsupported allegations to Zane's attention.

Required

(a) Work through this scenario using the American Accounting Association decision making model, and decide what action Luke should take.

(b) Would your decision be any different if you used the Mary Guy decision-making 2 model?

please do not post this answer again. when i see it, i will give you thumb down.

Solution to (a):

According to American Accounting Association decision- making model, we should analyse as following:

Step 1 - Establishing the facts of the case - Zane has to loose the assignment because of the issues between him and client wherein Zane recognised some of the flaws of the client.

Step 2 - Identify the ethical issues in the case - This involves the fact that Zane has to loose the assignment even after performing an excellent job and identifying a number of issues.

Step 3 - Identification of the norms, principles and values related to thecase - This involves taking the decision based on the social, ethical and professional behaviour context. Zane must have been heard before being replaced.

Step 4 - Identify each alternative course of action - This involves carving out the entire scenario with the view point of both the client and Zane rather than taking action on the basis of client's own will.

Step 5 - The norms, principles and values identified in Step 3 are overlaid on to the options identified in Step 4 - As such it can be seen that There should have been proper enquiry into the situation rather than taking the decision upfront.

Step 6 - The decision is made.

Solution to (b):

According to Mary Guy decision-making model, we should analyse as following:

Step 1 - Define the problem - Zane has to loose the assignment because of the issues between him and client wherein Zane recognised some of the flaws of the client.

Step 2 - Acknowledge the context in which the problem arose in order to identify all stakeholders involved - This involves the fact that Zane has to loose the assignment even after performing an excellent job and identifying a number of issues. The various stakeholders involved are client, Audit Manager, Luke and Zane.

Step 3 - Identify the values that are at stake - This involves social, ethical and professional values being at stake.Zane must have been heard before being replaced.

Step 4 - Select the values that must be maximized - Ethical values should have been maximised.

Step 5 - Choose the alternative that maximizes the essential values and minimizes as few as possible - This involves carving out the entire scenario with the view point of both the client and Zane rather than taking action on the basis of client's own will.

Step 6 - The decision is made.

As such both the models come to the same decision.