Woman C.P.A.

Volume 46 Issue 2 Article 7

4-1984

Deviant Behavior and Misconduct of Professionals

Howard M. Schilit

Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/wcpa

Part of the Accounting Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons

Recommended Citation
Schilit, Howard M. (1984) "Deviant Behavior and Misconduct of Professionals," Woman C.P.A.: Vol. 46 :
Iss. 2 , Article 7.
Available at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/wcpa/vol46/iss2/7

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Archival Digital Accounting Collection at eGrove. It
has been accepted for inclusion in Woman C.P.A. by an authorized editor of eGrove. For more information, please
contact [email protected].
 Durkheim’s (1933) work was an
antecedent for control theory. He
found that integration of social groups
was an important variable in ex­
plaining deviance. Disintegrated
Deviant Behavior and groups could not constrain individual
conduct and the more disintegrated
the groups, the more likely the de­

Misconduct of viance. Durkheim argued that when

unregulated by society’s moral authori­
ty, individual behavior will be unlimited

Professionals and will follow basic appetites and per­

sonal interests. Other proponents of
control theory include Reiss (1951),
Nye (1958), Matza (1964), and Hirschi
(1969).
(2) Societal reaction theory ex­
amines the effect of negative social
reactions on individual rule-breakers
and their behavior. It is societal reac­
tion which precipitates and shapes pat­
terns of deviant behavior. Societal
reaction theory suggests that deviance
By Howard M. Schilit is primarily the result of acceptance of,
and conformity to, negative expecta­
tions inherent in labels that are applied
when one is reacted to as a deviant.
Proponents of the societal reaction ap­
proach to deviance are Tannenbaum
(1938), Lemert (1951), Becker (1963)
and Goffman (1961).
This paper examines misconduct of Theories on Deviance
(3) Socialization theory asserts that
professionals and attempts to explain For many years sociologists have deviant behavior is learned and
why professionals might violate rules attempted to explain the causes of de­
transferred to the individual from his
of ethical conduct. To determine why viant behavior. Frazier (1976) con­
social setting. The internalization of
professionals might deviate from tended that there have been three
values is the ultimate force causing de­
established norms, a review of some broad theoretical approaches to
viant behavior in individuals. Central to
major theoretical studies of deviant explain deviant behavior which he
the socialization approach is the con­
behavior is provided. This study also termed: (1) control; (2) societal reac­
cept of anomie. Anomie is translated
examines several empirical studies on tion; and (3) socialization.
as normlessness — a state of societal
deviant behavior of professionals, (1) Control theory suggests that de­ deregulation where norms are ineffec­
specifically in the legal and auditing viance results from the inability of tive as sources of social control. It
professions. societies or groups to prevent its oc­ arises because the division of labor
currence; that is, it lacks social control. fails to produce sufficiently effective
Professionals, by virtue of their Frazier (1976) pointed out that control contacts between its members and
special training and knowledge are theory is as much a theory of con­ adequate regulations of social
granted greater autonomy than those formity as it is a theory of deviance relationships.
in other occupations. In exchange for stating:
autonomy, professionals must Durkheim (1933) initially identified
demonstrate a high level of com­ the concept of anomie and applied it
petence and ethicality. Professionals Human action, under normal condi­ to his classic study on suicide. He
establish codes of ethical conduct tions of social organization, is seen determined that suicides were oc­
which guide their members to follow to be regulated by social norms, and curring during a state of anomie. This
prescribed ethical norms. deviance is considered minimal
state of anomie was created by an
precisely because behavior is
regulated. But when the social
abrupt breakdown of social controls,
Sociologists have several theories to norms, and standards. It was at this
organization is for some reason
explain deviant behavior. An examina­ time or shortly thereafter that deviant
disrupted, the control force of norms
tion of the theories suggests reasons is weakened or broken, leaving behavior was most likely to occur.
for differential adherence to ethical human beings unregulated and
norms among professionals. The thereby free to deviate. Merton (1938) who redefined
degree of adherence to the ethical Durkheim’s concept of anomie,
norms serves as a measure of deviant regarded deviant behavior as a symp­
behavior. tom of a disorganized society. That is,
20/The Woman CPA, April, 1984
when the cultural system was not coor­ vary according to one’s location in the
dinated with the social system, socie­ social strata. If one has access to de­
ty was “malintegrated.” Merton con­ viant subcultures and the opportunity
tended that “when all members of a presents itself when a period of
society share the same goals but the anomie exists, deviant behavior is Carlin concluded that
legitimate means for achieving the more likely to occur. unethical behavior was the
goals are not equally available or not
available at all to some segments,
Review of the literature on deviance result of situational pressures
suggests alternative theoretical ap­ and one’s inner disposition.
society would be malintegrated and
proaches for studying misconduct
high rates of deviance may be
among professionals. Much empirical
expected.”
research to date examining miscon­
Merton concluded that individuals duct of professionals has followed the
develop values and behavior patterns socialization approach to deviance.
relative to their location in the social
structure. If one’s position in the social Empirical Studies on
structure was especially exposed to Professional Misconduct
disequilibrium between cultural goals This section reviews five major the least pressure to violate norms. In
and institutional means, deviant empirical studies on misconduct of contrast, lawyers in small firms and
behavior was more probable. Merton professionals. Each follows the sole practitioners were exposed to
also stated that “... the greatest “socialization” approach which greater client pressure and had more
pressures toward deviation are exerted focuses on structural explanations for opportunities to violate professional
on the lower social strata” Many in the deviance. These studies suggest that and community norms.
lower social strata do not conform to a professional’s location within the
institutional norms because of the ex­ social organization of a profession Carlin found that colleagues were an
istence of other cultural goals. determines the pressures and oppor­ important element of the lawyer’s
tunities to violate professional rules of social system. Based on the lawyers’
ethical conduct. Factors such as the attitude toward professional ethics,
type of firm, clients, and colleagues Carlin classified each law firm into a:
may vary across different social strata (1) permissive; (2) strict; or (3) mixed
of a profession. These studies suggest group. He found that those in per­
that differential adherence to rules of missive firms were most likely while
ethical conduct by professionals may those in strict firms were least likely to
be related to location within the social violate rules of ethical conduct. He
Socialization theory asserts found that seniority was important
that internalization of values strata of the profession.
since the longer one was in a per­
is the ultimate force causing The empirical studies which will be
missive office, the more likely he was
reviewed are by Carlin (1966), Handler
deviant behavior in (1967), Loeb (1970), Yerkes (1975) and
to be involved in unethical behavior.
individuals. Conversely, the longer one was in a
Schilit (1981).
strict firm, the less likely he was to
Summary of Carlin’s Study (1966) behave unethically.
The most comprehensive study of de­
viant behavior in the legal profession Carlin found that the size of the firm
is Carlin’s study of New York City was related to unethical behavior,
lawyers. Carlin considered the social although not directly. When lawyers in
setting in which the lawyer worked an large and small firms practiced under
Cohen (1966) and Cloward and important factor in explaining unethical similar conditions, there was little dif­
Ohlin (1960) extended Merton’s theory behavior. The focus of his study was ference in their rates of conformity or
of anomie. Cohen contended that on the social system of the lawyer and nonconformity to ethical rules.
lower-class individuals, especially, on situational pressures and oppor­ However, lawyers in these two settings
were pressured into situations which tunities he experienced to engage in rarely practiced under similar condi­
were likely to result in deviant behavior. unethical behavior. tions. Factors such as: type of clients;
Cloward and Ohlin asserted that the social background; and educational
“social support of a subculture of de­ Carlin found significant differences
level differentiate large and small firm
viant peers contributed to deviant within the social organization of the
lawyers, and these factors directly af­
behavior.” Individuals were likely to legal profession. He concluded that the
fect ethical behavior.
emulate and become socialized into size of the law firm determined the
the deviant roles that were available in degree of situational inducements to Carlin also examined the importance
the immediate environment. violate norms. Lawyers in large law of personality, or “inner disposition”
firms had different types of: practices, (ethical concern) in explaining
In summary, the socialization ap­ clientele, and income than lawyers in unethical behavior. He found that
proach attempts to explain deviant small firms and sole practitioners. lawyers with a low concern for ethics
behavior within the framework of the Those in large firms were the most were most likely and those with a high
social organization. Pressures and op­ financially secure, and they received concern were least likely to behave
portunities for deviant behavior may the most pressure to conform to and unethically.
The Woman CPA, April, 1984/21
 He concluded that unethical characteristics that are unique to the from peers and clients since they were
behavior was a result of situational individual CPA. more dependent on a few large clients,
pressures and the inner disposition of Among the findings in the Loeb and they faced fierce competition from
the lawyer. But while the inner disposi­ study were the following: nonprofessionals.
tion to be ethical was spread evenly (1) Accountants with high-status
throughout the legal profession, the Yerkes concluded that as the
clients experienced less pressure
situational pressures to be unethical vulnerability to commit unethical acts
to violate ethical norms than ac­
“were greatest at the lower end of the and as the opportunity to do so rose,
countants with low-status clients.
profession.’’ the accountant’s chances of violating
(2) CPAs with marginal practices had the Code of Professional Ethics also
greater vulnerability to client rose. Local CPAs were most
pressure and because of vulnerable to client pressure, but PAs
economic reasons would be more exhibited the most unethical behavior
likely to violate the code. because of what Yerkes called “indif­
(3) As the accountant’s opportunity ference and isolation’’ and because
to violate the code increased, the they were involved in the least amount
frequency with which he violated of auditing work of all three segments
A professional’s location
also increased. of the accounting profession.
within the social stratification
(4) A strict office attitude (toward the
of a profession may deter­ code) was likely to decrease the
mine the pressures and op­ willingness of its members to
portunities to violate ethical violate the code, while a per­
norms. missive attitude was likely to
reinforce the accountant’s
vulnerability to outside pressures
to violate.
(5) An accountant’s ethical behavior
Yerkes found that local CPAs
was affected by his concern with felt great pressure from peers
Summary of Handler’s Study ethics, his attentiveness to ethical and clients and they faced
(1967) Handler studied the legal pro­ issues, and his membership in fierce competition from
fession in Milwaukee, a middle-sized the AICPA. A high attentiveness nonprofessionals.
midwestern city, and confirmed many to ethical issues increased the ac­
of Carlin’s results. He suggested that countant’s likelihood to act
deviant behavior was related to the ethically.
stability and wealth of a lawyer’s
Summary of Yerkes’ Study (1975)
clientele and to his opportunities to
Yerkes, who studied Certified Public
commit ethical violations. He found
Accountants (CPAs) and Public Ac­
that a highly integrated professional
countants (PAs) in Cincinnati, Ohio,
bar that consisted of small firms and Summary of Schilit’s Study (1981)
replicated the methodology employed
that did not specialize received little The Schilit study, which is an exten­
by Carlin and Loeb. He examined
competition from other occupations. sion of these recent empirical studies
adherence of CPAs of national and
Handler found only minor violations of on professional misconduct, examines
local firms and of Ohio PAs to the
professional norms which he con­ adherence to ethical standards within
AICPA Code of Professional Ethics.
cluded resulted from the less com­ the auditing profession. Specifically, it
Yerkes found that the accountant’s
petitive small city bar. He suggested focused on the likely compliance with
location in the social organization of
that in a big city bar violation of com­ rules of ethical conduct on auditor in­
the profession influenced his
munity norms would probably be more dependence by practitioners who do
adherence to the Code of Professional
common. audit work.
Ethics. This location determined the
accountant’s type of work, clientele, Similar to the four empirical studies,
Summary of Loeb’s Study (1970) and pressures to violate ethical Schilit also followed the “socialization
Loeb examined factors that account for standards. approach” to explain the misconduct
variation in ethical behavior in the of professionals. A professional’s loca­
Milwaukee professional auditing com­ Yerkes found that members in na­ tion within the social stratification of a
munity. He studied such factors as: tional firms had the highest conformi­ profession may determine the
client pressure; opportunities to violate ty to the AICPA Code of Professional pressures and opportunities to violate
norms; clientele; ethical concern; at­ Ethics. He concluded that the greater ethical norms. The auditing profession
tentiveness to ethical issues; office col­ emphasis on auditing by national firms can be stratified according to firm size
league relations; and professional was an important reason for their high as: (1) large; or (2) small. Socialization
organization membership to ethical ethical behavior. He found that local theory suggests that members in dif­
behavior. Loeb concluded that varia­ CPAs and PAs (which performed the ferent strata face differential in­
tion in ethical behavior seemed to be least auditing) had the lowest ducements and pressures which might
related to two components; (1) the ac­ adherence to the AICPA Code of Pro­ lead to differential compliance with
countant’s place in the professional fessional Ethics. Yerkes found that professional norms. Merton (1938) and
stratification system; and (2) certain local CPAs felt the greatest pressure others suggested that those in the
22/The Woman CPA, April, 1984
lower strata (small firms) may face Significance, Implications These policy-makers or other re­
greater pressure to violate ethical and Future Research searchers may wish to investigate
norms and might succumb to this causes for the apparent problem of
Recently, critics have questioned
pressure and violate the norms. noncompliance with several rules of
the motives of professions and profes­
sionals, suggesting a lack of strong ethical conduct.
The study examined the propensity community commitment and a failure
of auditors to violate selected rules of to meet societal needs by profes­
ethical conduct on audit-independence sionals. In particular, the auditing pro­
and identified factors associated with fession has recently been under closer
such violation. Data were obtained by scrutiny by the SEC, following two
presenting participants twelve Congressional Committee investiga­
hypothetical cases involving potential tions which questioned professional Socialization theory teaches
violations of independence rules and autonomy. that deviant behavior is learn­
asking them how they would act in the ed and transferred to the in­
cases presented. In part, to test whether professionals
met societal expectations of high dividual from his social or
Results indicated that those auditors
ethical behavior, several researchers organizational setting.
have examined the ethical conduct of
surveyed showed a propensity to
professionals. These studies have em­
violate and to reject various rules of
pirically tested whether professionals
ethical conduct on independence mat­
adhered to established rules of ethical
ters. Descriptive statistics revealed
conduct. The results of each study
that few auditors indicated a propen­
found differential adherence to ethical
sity to adhere to or to accept all twelve
norms, with differences in firm size be­
independence cases presented. Chi-
ing the most important explanatory (3) Results of this research suggest
square, regression analysis, and log-
factor. that noncompliance of audit­
linear modeling indicated that firm size
was the major factor in explaining dif­ independence rules may be pervasive
The Schilit study is significant for in the population studied. Reasons for
ferential adherence to independence several reasons.
rules. the apparent lack of compliance could
(1) Similar to results from previous em­ range from a simple lack of awareness
pirical studies on misconduct of profes­ or understanding to a willful disregard
The study contributes to the sionals, it found a propensity among for the rules. Research could address
literature by: (1) extending previous auditors to violate several rules of con­ reasons for noncompliance with rules
research on ethical conduct by focus­ duct on ethical behavior. Results in­ of ethical conduct on audit­
ing on compliance to specific rules of dicated that on the average, auditors independence. If further investigation
conduct on audit-independence; (2) showed a propensity to violate one- indicates the problem results from the
confirming conclusions of these third of the cases presented. Since it auditors’ lack of awareness or
previous studies which found some was assumed that competent and understanding of the rules of conduct,
noncompliance to rules of ethical con­ ethical professionals should comply then additional training and better
duct; (3) introducing log-linear model­ with all rules of ethical behavior, the communication by the rule-makers
ing, a different and a theoretically results indicated a potential problem of could be considered. If, however, fur­
correct method for evaluating the fac­ noncompliance. ther investigation finds noncompliance
tors explaining differential adherence results from a willful disregard for the
to the rules of ethical conduct; and (4) This finding lends support to critics rules, then stronger and more forceful
confirming socialization theory on de­ who contend that professionals have disciplinary actions may be necessary
viance and related empirical studies on failed to meet their responsibilities. to punish the violators.
misconduct of professionals which The results of this study can, in part,
suggest differential adherence to rules give an indication to whether auditors (4) Similar to results in previous em­
of ethical conduct may be explained by are meeting their professional respon­ pirical studies, this research found
firm size. sibilities to act ethically. Based upon differential adherence to audit­
results from this limited sample in independence rules based on firm
Baltimore, it is questionable whether size. Auditors employed by small firms
these auditors are acting responsibly. appeared more likely to violate rules of
conduct than those employed by large
(2) Policy-makers, such as the SEC, firms. Since this finding confirms Loeb
the AICPA, and/or the Congress, may (1970) and Yerkes (1975), more
The Schilit study suggests dif­ wish to consider these findings in their evidence suggests that firm size may
ferential adherence to rules of attempt to improve the financial repor­ be an important determinant in ex­
ethical conduct may be ex­ ting process. Results of this study, plaining differential adherence to rules
plained by firm size. while limited in scope to Baltimore, of ethical conduct. Research could be
suggested a propensity among considered to examine factors
auditors to violate several rules of associated with firm size that account
ethical conduct on independence pro­ for the differential adherence to rules
mulgated by the SEC and the AICPA. of ethical conduct.
The Woman CPA, April, 1984/23
 Findings of differential adherence to Frazier, Charles E. Theoretical Approaches to
audit-independence rules based on Deviance: An Evaluation. Columbus, Ohio:
Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 1976.
firm size is consistent with socialization
Goffman, Erving. Asylums: Essays on the
theory of deviance. Socialization Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other In­

Attn: theory teaches that deviant behavior is

learned and transferred to the in­
dividual from his social setting.
mates. New York: Doubleday, 1961.
Handler, Joel F. The Lawyer and His Com­
munity, The Practicing Bar in a Middle-Sized
Therefore, values of an individual may City. Milwaukee: The University of Wisconsin

Authors & be shaped by factors associated with

his or her organization. These values
may affect compliance to rules of
Press, 1967.
Hirschi, Travis. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1969.
Lemert, Edwin H. Social Pathology. New York;

Artists ethical conduct.

Summary
McGraw-Hill, 1951.
Loeb, Stephen E. A Behavioral Study of CPA
Ethics. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Univer­
The objective of this paper was to sity of Wisconsin, 1979.
present theoretical and empirical Matza, David. Delinquency and Drift. New
You can turn your accounting York, John Wiley, 1964.
knowledge into visibility and promo­ evidence on the misconduct of profes­
Merton, Robert, “Social Structure and
tion of yourself. The Woman CPA is sionals. Several broad theoretical ap­ Anomie.” American Sociological Review 3 (Oc­
on the lookout for interesting, well proaches to explain deviant behavior tober 1938): 672-82.
written articles, cartoons, account­ — (1) control; (2) societal reaction; and Nye, Ivan F. Family Relationships and Delin­
ing crossword puzzles, et cetera. (3) socialization — were reviewed. quent Behavior. New York: John Wiley, 1958.
Socialization theory, which includes Reiss, Albert J. Jr. “Delinquency as the
For additional information and for­ anomie, contends that individuals Failure of Personal and Social Controls.’’
mat, see our manuscript guidelines develop values and behavior patterns American Sociological Review. 1951: 196-207.
on page 32. relative to their location in the social Schilit, Howard. An Empirical Study on Audit
Independence. Unpublished D.B.A. Dissertation,
structure. University of Maryland, 1981.
Feature articles should be sent to: These recent empirical studies of Tannenbaum, Frank. Crime and the Communi­
Donald DeHaven the legal and auditing professions, ty. New York: Ginn, 1938.
P.O. Box 4383 which followed the socialization theory Yerkes, Russell E. Variations in Adherence to
Springfield, MO 65808-4383 of deviance, suggested that differen­ Expressed Rules of Ethics by the Accounting Pro­
fession and Some Factors Associated With Such
tial adherence to rules of ethical
Variations. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Letters, cartoons, accounting conduct was based on location in the State University of New York at Buffalo, 1975.
puzzles, charts, graphs and other professional community. Professionals
material should be sent to the in different social strata within the
editor. The material should be social organization of a profession fac­
original and not previously publish­ ed differential pressures and oppor­
ed elsewhere. tunities to violate professional norms.
These studies found that members in
the lower social strata faced greater
pressure to violate professional norms.
Such factors as the type of clientele
REVIEWS and colleagues, and the size of prac­
tice affected conformity to ethical rules.
WANTED
Reviews fill a much needed func­
tion in the life of busy professionals
who are inundated with reading BIBLIOGRAPHY
material. If you are interested in
contributing to the reviews column, Becker, Howard S. Outsiders: Studies in the
first clear the name of the book or Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press,
article with the reviews editor to 1963.
avoid duplication. For sug­ Carlin, Jerome. Lawyers’ Ethics. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1966.
gestions and more information
Clinard, Marshall B. Anomie and Deviant
contact: Behavior. New York: Free Press, 1964.
Cloward, Richard and Ohlin, Lloyd. Delinquen­
Jewell Shane cy and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Howard M. Schilit, DBA, CPA, is
510 Gwynne Building Gangs. New York: Free Press, 1960. assistant professor of accounting at
602 Main Street Cohen, Albert. Deviance and Control. New American University, Washington, D. C.
York: Free Press, 1964.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 He holds a DBA and MBA from the
Cullen, John. The Structure of Professionalism.
New York: PBI, 1978.
University of Maryland and is a member
Durkheim, Emile. The Division of Labor in
of the AICPA, AAA, Maryland Associa­
Society. New York: The Macmillan Company, tion of CPAs and the D.C. Institute of
1933. CPAs.

24/The Woman CPA, April, 1984