Humaira Ahmed
Prof. Dignam
ACCT 723
Spring 2015
  1. Jeffrey skiling the CEO and Keneeth lay the chief executive they put all their attention for Enron’s strong earnings performance.
  * Enron’s top executives main goal was to increase the company’s strong earnings performance.
  * The accountant and auditors didn’t pay any attention to the books and accounting principal while recording any transaction. As we have seen from the cases the example of Watkins who was Enron’s accountant. She notice in the official documents the way other Enron’s officials used aggressive accounting treatment to this transaction. She already foreshadows Enron’s future to Lay. If these difficult transaction get disclosed Enron won’t survive in the game. Before Watkins reached out to Lay she want to discuss the issue with one of her subordinates. That subordinates rejected to see the significant problem, which she identified in the accounting decision made previously by Enron.
So we can conclude all the high rank officials of Enron CEO, CFO, accountant or auditors wasn’t carrying their responsibilities toward their professional ethically.
  2. After reading the cases there are couple of things became noticeable which Anderson shouldn’t do.
  * Firstly they exchange fees for non audit consulting services. Leonard Spack’s daughter mention “Anderson couldn’t consult and audit the same firm because it was a conflict of interest.
  * Anderson involvement in key Accounting and financial reporting decision for Enron’s SPE transaction. Such as Anderson participate and advice structuring Enron’s accounting treatment. For this Anderson charged 1 million still it didn’t produce any result.
  * Last but not the least was that Anderson shred the large important audit document.
These are the three expert services unrelated to audit that Anderson   audit firm provide to Enron.

3       – Anderson destroys their independence as audit firm through their extensive   involvement...