Stupid Ethics question... all, his, corporate, question, research

LokiDog2

Lawrence Hall, CFA, and Nancy Bishop, CFA, began a joint research report on Stamper Corporation. Bishop spent several days visiting Stamper’s corporate headquarters and meeting with all company officers. Prior to the completion of the report, Bishop was reassigned to another project. Hall utilized his and Bishop’s research to write the report. According to the CFA Institute Standards of Practice Handbook, did Hall violate any CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct?
A. No.
B. Yes, with respect to misrepresentation.
C. Yes, with respect to independence and objectivity.
D. Yes, with respect to diligence and reasonable basis.
anyone?

tikfed

no, but 60% of the time the CFA can find some sort of violation with analyst decisions every time

luda002

A. No.
Due diligence was done by teamwork.

bbtomato

From the information provided I would say no, but there could be some traps here
1. If Hall does not acknowledge the work of Bishop there could be plagerism therefore misrepresentation.
2. If Hall does not satisfy himself that Bishop’s work is solid there could be an issue with diligence and reasonable basis
3. If Bishop was overly friendly with company officials during the visit and pervayed this in the report there could be issues with objectivity.
But the question mentioned none of these issues so I am going with D.

Roflnadal

A is the given answer
How is this not misrepresentation if he does not credit the previous analyst for her work in the report?
$#%@# ethics

Analyze_This

TheTrader Wrote:
——————————————————-
> A is the given answer
>
> How is this not misrepresentation if he does not
> credit the previous analyst for her work in the
> report?
>
> $#%@# ethics
Who said he didn’t? No evidence of that.

justin88

A - from info provided.

ASSet_MANagemen

Definitely A

ninja1024

Bump
Hands down this is A. From my understanding, if you are working in an internal team, the reference is going to the team/organization. It becomes a problem when that report is published and used by an internal member and not referenced. Also Aussie_jacos post was an excellent indication of the potential violations that could have occurred in this scenario:
1. If Hall does not acknowledge the work of Bishop there could be plagerism therefore misrepresentation.
2. If Hall does not satisfy himself that Bishop’s work is solid there could be an issue with diligence and reasonable basis
3. If Bishop was overly friendly with company officials during the visit and pervayed this in the report there could be issues with objectivity.

Houjichasan

A.
It is not misrepresentation because they were compiling research together as a team. It is not like he ripped this analysis off of someone else. He should still site Bishop as the source of some of the data to be safe…. I think