IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/majpps/maj-11-2013-0957.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Guanxi, a two-edged sword! How Australian accounting professionals view the process within a moral framework

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Han Fan
  • Gordon Woodbine
  • Glennda Scully

Abstract

Purpose - – The purpose of this study is to determine how Western business practitioners, specifically Australian accounting professionals, identify with the Chinese value concept ofguanxiand the impact of their perceptions ofguanxion their ethical decision-making. This objective is predicated by a belief that aspects ofguanxiare similar to the Western concepts of social networking and would be identified by practitioners as an organizational process providing positive benefits to those associated with its application. Further, it is anticipated that concepts ofguanxiinfluence the way Australian accountants form ethical judgements and intentions, precursors to acceptable moral behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - – A cross-sectional questionnaire based on a survey of 111 usable Australian accounting professionals was completed during 2012. A confirmatory factor analysis was used to validate each construct ofguanxibefore a path analysis was performed. Findings - – Australian accounting professionals associate well with the favour-seeking aspects ofguanxi, suggesting an affiliation with Western concepts of social networking. Both groups (i.e. public accountants and private accountants) reject rent-seekingguanxias clearly unethical. Rent-seekingguanxiis seen to directly influence ethical judgement and intention; however, their favour-seekingguanxiattitudes do not influence ethical judgement or intention, regardless of employment type. Public and private accountants applyguanxiin a differential manner when determining moral intention. Public accountants are viewed as acting spontaneously without adequately considering the consequences (via the judgement phase), which appears to be a function of the nature of their personal association with the case study applied in this research. Originality/value - – The research provides evidence that Australian accounting professionals relate to favour-seekingguanxias representative of a broader notion of social networking. In this context, theguanxiinstrument appears to be amenable to cross-cultural evaluations of group behaviour. Significant differences of opinion exist compared to the prior Chinese studies when unethical practices are considered. Theguanxiinstrument proves to be a useful tool when examining the group interactions involving Western professionals and also helps establish differences in moral constructions based on employment types.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Han Fan & Gordon Woodbine & Glennda Scully, 2014. "Guanxi, a two-edged sword! How Australian accounting professionals view the process within a moral framework," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 29(8), pages 695-716, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:majpps:maj-11-2013-0957
    DOI: 10.1108/MAJ-11-2013-0957
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MAJ-11-2013-0957/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MAJ-11-2013-0957/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/MAJ-11-2013-0957?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:majpps:maj-11-2013-0957. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.