Prior to the Enron-Arthur Anderson scandal, auditors were generally considered independent and trustworthy professionals. They protected the interests of the individual investor by ensuring that companies presented financial statements that fairly reflected the financial results of their operations. The auditor was trusted to present the facts as he saw them, whatever the implications. When events such as the Academy Awards used the services of a CPA, it was not because counting ballots was a technically difficult task, but because people believed that CPAs could be trusted. The recent problems experienced by many of the nation's largest accounting firms "have taken away something important from all accountants: the confidence that practicing or teaching others to practice accounting is an honorable way to spend one's life (Williams 2003). » Traditional auditing involved many time-consuming practices that increased the likelihood of fraud detection, such as multiple site visits, asset observation, and random sampling of non-material levels. Additionally, the audit was closely supervised by senior partners who believed that the integrity of their firm was at stake with each engagement. However, as revenues from consulting services increased, the audit function became simply part of a package that accounting firms offered in conjunction with the more lucrative consulting services. As the financial rewards of audits diminished, so did the scope and depth of the procedures performed. In recent years, audits have been reduced to computerized test checks and statistical modeling. Another development is that junior accountants are often given crucial oversight roles that were traditionally filled by senior partners who are now... middle of paper ... firm's books and records do not reflect the company performance.ReferencesBloch, G. (2003, April). Effects of Sarbanes-Oxley on Internal Revenue Controls. The CPA Journal, 73(4), 68. Colson, R. (April 2003). Maintaining Public Credibility: An Interview with Charles D. Niemeier. The CPA Journal, 73(4), 18. Frieswick, K. (July 2003). How audits need to change. CFO, 19(9), 42-44, 46-48, 50. McConnell Jr., DK, Banks, GY (September 2003). How Sarbanes-Oxley will change the audit process. Journal of Accountancy, 196(3), 48-55. Nyberg, A. (September 2003). The True Cost of Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance. CFO, 19(11), 57. Williams, P. (April 2003). The Association for Integrity in Accounting enters the debate on accounting reforms. The CPA Journal, 73(4), 14. Wolosky, H. (July 2003). Living with Sarbanes-Oxley. The practical accountant, 36(7), 4.