Arthur Anderson: Questionable Accounting Practices
Posted: December 11th, 2013
- Read the Arthur Anderson: Questionable Accounting Practices case. You are to write a four to six (4-6) page paper that answers the following questions:
- Review the mandated requirements for legal compliance (from Chapter 4) and determine which requirements apply to the Arthur Anderson case. Explain your rationale.
- Discuss how the issues with the Arthur Anderson case may have played out differently if the Sarbanes-Oxley Act had been enacted in 1999.
- Determine and discuss which elements of the framework for ethical decision making in business (from Chapter 5) played the biggest role in the Anderson case. Explain your reasoning.
- Discuss how the situations at Arthur Anderson may have played out differently if their senior management had displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders. Provide specific examples to support your response.
- Include at least three (3) references, no more than three (3) years old, from material outside the course.
The format of the paper is to be as follows:
- Typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), one-inch margins on all sides (APA format).
- Type the question followed by your answer to the question.
- In addition to the four to six (4-6) pages required, a title page is to be included. The title page is to contain the title of the assignment, your name, the instructor’s name, the course title, and the date.
Note: You will be graded on the quality of your answers, the logic/organization of the report, your language skills, and your writing skills.
The assignment will be graded using the following rubric:
|
Outcomes Assessed |
|
|
Grading Rubric for Assignment 3 – “Arthur Anderson: Questionable Accounting Practices” |
|
|
Criteria |
0 |
20 |
30 |
40 |
| 1. Review the mandated requirements for legal compliance (from Chapter 4) and determine which requirements apply to the Arthur Anderson case. Explain your rationale. | Did not complete the assignment or did not review the mandated requirements for legal compliance (from Chapter 4) and determine which requirements apply to the Arthur Anderson case. Did not explain your rationale; omitted key information or included significant amounts of irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Partially reviewed the mandated requirements for legal compliance (from Chapter 4) and determined which requirements apply to the Arthur Anderson case. Partially explained your rationale; omitted some information or included some irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70-79% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Sufficiently reviewed the mandated requirements for legal compliance (from Chapter 4) and determined which requirements apply to the Arthur Anderson case. Sufficiently explained your rationale. Completed with 80-89% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Fully reviewed the mandated requirements for legal compliance (from Chapter 4) and determined which requirements apply to the Arthur Anderson case. Fully explained your rationale. Completed with 90-100% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. |
| 2. Discuss how the issues with the Arthur Anderson case may have played out differently if the Sarbanes-Oxley act had been enacted in 1999. | Did not complete the assignment or did not discuss how the issues with the Arthur Anderson case may have played out differently if the Sarbanes-Oxley act had been enacted in 1999; omitted key information or included significant amounts of irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Partially discussed how the issues with the Arthur Anderson case may have played out differently if the Sarbanes-Oxley act had been enacted in 1999; omitted some information or included some irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70-79% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Sufficiently discussed how the issues with the Arthur Anderson case may have played out differently if the Sarbanes-Oxley act had been enacted in 1999. Completed with 80-89% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Fully discussed how the issues with the Arthur Anderson case may have played out differently if the Sarbanes-Oxley act had been enacted in 1999. Completed with 90-100% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. |
| 3. Determine and discuss which elements of the framework for ethical decision making in business (from Chapter 5) played the biggest role in the Anderson case. Explain your reasoning. | Did not complete the assignment or did not determine and discuss which elements of the framework for ethical decision making in business (from Chapter 5) played the biggest role in the Anderson case. Did not explain your reasoning; omitted key information or included significant amounts of irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Partially determined and discussed which elements of the framework for ethical decision making in business (from Chapter 5) played the biggest role in the Anderson case. Partially explained your reasoning; omitted some information or included some irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70-79% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Sufficiently determined and discussed which elements of the framework for ethical decision making in business (from Chapter 5) played the biggest role in the Anderson case. Sufficiently explained your reasoning. Completed with 80-89% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Fully determined and discussed which elements of the framework for ethical decision making in business (from Chapter 5) played the biggest role in the Anderson case. Fully explained your reasoning. Completed with 90-100% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. |
| 4. Discuss how the situations at Arthur Anderson may have played out differently if their senior management had displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders. Provide specific examples to support your response. | Did not complete the assignment or did not discuss how the situations at Arthur Anderson may have played out differently if their senior management had displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders. Did not provide specific examples to support your response; omitted key information or included significant amounts of irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Partially discussed how the situations at Arthur Anderson may have played out differently if their senior management had displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders. Partially provided specific examples to support your response; omitted some information or included some irrelevant information. Completed with less than 70-79% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Sufficiently discussed how the situations at Arthur Anderson may have played out differently if their senior management had displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders. Sufficiently provided specific examples to support your response. Completed with 80-89% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. | Fully discussed how the situations at Arthur Anderson may have played out differently if their senior management had displayed the habits of strong ethical leaders. Fully provided specific examples to support your response. Completed with 90-100% accuracy, thoroughness, and logic. |
| 5. Include at least three (3) references (no more than three years old) from material outside the text. | Included no references (no more than three years old) from material outside the text. | Included one (1) reference (no more than three years old) from material outside the text. | Included two (2) references (no more than three years old) from material outside the text. | Included three or more (3+) references (no more than three years old) from material outside the text. |
| 6. Clarity | Did not complete the assignment or explanations are unclear and not organized. (Major issues) |
Explanations generally unclear and not well organized. (Many issues) |
Explanations generally clear and/or organized. (Minor issues) | Explanations very clear and well organized. (Added helpful details) |
| 7. Writing – Grammar, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling, punctuation, APA usage. | Did not complete the assignment or had 8 or more different errors in grammar, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling, punctuation, or APA usage. (Major issues) | Had 6–7 different errors in grammar, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling, punctuation or APA usage. (Many issues) | Had 4–5 different errors in grammar, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling, punctuation or APA usage. (Minor issues) | Had 0–3 different errors in grammar, sentence structure, paragraph structure, spelling, punctuation or APA usage. |
Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.