Access over 20 million homework & study documents

ACC 206 WEEK 2 DQ 1

Content type
User Generated
Type
Homework
Rating
Showing Page:
1/2
From Chapter 14, Fraud Case 14-1. Complete all parts of the case and respond to at least two of your classmates’ postings by
Day 7.
Response 1
Frank's company most likely will only be hurt by his fraudulent action if the first lowest
bidding company was a better contractor then Bo’s company. There is a saying that you pay
for what you get, so just because they were the lowest bidding contractors, does not mean that
they were the better choice. They probably had less knowledgeable people working for them
because they were probably paying them less and there is also the possibility that that they
were planning on using cheaper materials which would have negatively affected the company
in the long run.
What Frank did was unethical and shows that he should have never received that promotion.
He is facing the possibility of jail time and termination from his job if his superiors ever find
out.
Businesses can protect themselves against this kind of fraud by having a clear separation of
duties. All financial transactions or major decisions should be done by more than one person.
The opening of the bid should not have been possible by him alone. There should have been
some form of checks and balances as to when the bid came in (sealed), when it was opened,
the dollar amount that each company bid, and what (2) people were witness to this occurring.
Response 2
I think that Frank's company was initially impacted by the unethical decision that he made.
With that being said, I think there is definite potential for his company to be hurt for a
number of reasons. First and foremost, it is my feeling that if Frank is willing to make one
unethical decision, it is very possible that he would be willing to make others, and while this
one didn't damage the company initially, he wasn't caught, he received payment for his
unethical decision, teaching him that this is acceptable and profitable behavior for him to
engage in. I think there is also potential for his company to be harmed, because if Bo is
willing to earn the job unethically, who knows what other type of corners he cuts with his
company and the work that they do.
At first, this doesn't appear to have hurt Frank. However, moving forward if he were to
continue making choices like this and get caught, at the very least he would lose the trust of
his coworkers and employer. It is more likely though if he were to get caught that he would
lose his job. Losing a job under these circumstances particularly if you are working in an
industry where the employers competition are in close contact with each other, it is likely that
word could spread about Franks behavior, making it difficult for him to gain employment
elsewhere.
In accounting we learn about the importance of separation of duties. I think that this concept
is definitely something that could help protect a company from such behaviors. In addition to
this, when there are situations where companies are placing bids such as this it is something
that should be closely monitored and have special processes in place that don't give one
person access to the information prior to the decision making process. If these type of steps

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
2/2

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Unformatted Attachment Preview
From Chapter 14, Fraud Case 14-1.? Complete all parts of the case and respond to at least two of your classmates' postings by Day 7.? Response 1 Frank's company most likely will only be hurt by his fraudulent action if the first lowest bidding company was a better contractor then Bo's company. There is a saying that you pay for what you get, so just because they were the lowest bidding contractors, does not mean that they were the better choice. They probably had less knowledgeable people working for them because they were probably paying them less and there is also the possibility that that t ...
Purchase document to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Anonymous
Nice! Really impressed with the quality.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4