Rules are intended to safeguard quality and independence. But what happens when those same rules make you feel that you are actually less able to serve your clients well?
The study by Picard et al. (2025) explores how accountants in small accounting firms deal with independence rules that appear to be largely designed from the perspective of larger firms. In doing so, the research also highlights that the accounting profession is far from uniform; rather, it consists of several distinct subgroups. At the extremes, the authors distinguish between:
• Professional elites – typically working in Big Four firms, with sufficient resources and influence to participate in the development of professional regulations.
• Rank and file practitioners (RFPs) – accountants working in smaller firms who are closely involved in the day-to-day execution of engagements and operate in close proximity to their clients.
Using the example of independence rules, the authors examine how RFPs apply these rules in practice. For these practitioners, one professional ideal stands out: they aim to act as a business partner to their clients, supporting them as effectively as possible through their professional expertise.
This is where tensions arise. Providing intensive support to clients can quickly lead to conflicts with independence rules.
The response? Not open rebellion. But what the authors call secret professional deviance. A subtle shift. A quiet reinterpretation. Departing from the rule because strict compliance would, in their view, lead to less professional service.
The study identifies two factors that may turn this inclination into actual rule deviation:
• The professional ideal – a powerful intrinsic driver that provides meaning and satisfaction in professional work.
• Morality – the ability to rationalize behaviour that does not fully comply with rules as acceptable when it serves the professional ideal.
On the one hand, the study shows that regulations do not always align seamlessly with every practice context. On the other hand, it reveals how secret deviance may quietly undermine the very objectives those rules are meant to protect.
Reflection questions
👉 What does your professional ideal look like? And how does it compare to that of your colleagues?
👉 Are there rules that make you feel tempted to deviate from them — perhaps quietly? And how do you deal with that tension?