2-3 page essay with citations. Find an unethical accounting case/scandal in the past and use either one of the justification models (in sequence) to justify what the ethical problem was and what you would have done differently to achieve an ethical outcome.
Mill’s justification process:
1. Complete a list of actions you might take.
2. List the stakeholders likely to be affected by the decision.
3. Decide the likely consequences from each option.
4. Ask whether someone who might get harmed actually deserves to be harmed.
5. Choose the consequence that would seem to provide the most benefit to the largest aggregate of people.
6. Conclude whether some harm could be justified because it promotes the overall good of the community.
Kant’s justification model:
1. Decide what you want to do.
2. Figure out what professional “rule” (ethics code) you would be obeying if you follow through on that decision. (you have to state which accounting code/codes you have chosen and cite them)
3. Try to universalise that rule. The rule should apply to you and to others.
4. Question whether you rule, and thus your proposed action, respects the dignity of all people involved.