Introduction There are situations that occur in the workplace that we are forced to choose between bad and worse options. Ethical dilemmas in the workplace are major challenges for every employee, and dealing with them is a major struggle. This paper seeks to apply the six steps approach to address an ethical dilemma faced by an employee in an audit firm. Relevant facts According to the auditing guidelines given by the PCAOB, the documentation of an audit that has been carried out must be completed and submitted within 45 days (Arens, Elder, & Beasley, 2013). It concerns any publicly traded client. The guidelines also rule that any additional documentation that will be attached to the audit after the stipulated deadline must indicate the date of completion. Other additional information, such as the preparers’ signature and the purpose of inclusion, must also be indicated (Arens et al., 2013). Auditors are prohibited from changing or altering the original audit document. The audit report must be submitted in its original format without any form of modification by the audit teams as required by the PCAOB guidelines (Arens et al., 2013). PCAOB inspections are very effective in identifying serious audit deficiencies (Arens et al., 2013). If there will be deficiencies identified by the PCAOB, the partner who is a new and a prospective appointee will suffer image damages. The audit deficiencies will make him/her look bad, and he/she may face very serious penalties from the firm as disciplinary measures. Ethical issues from the facts The ethical issue, in this case, is very clear and conspicuous when one reads the text carefully. Ann, who is eyeing for a promotion to become a partner, is faced with a challenge where she has to make one choice from two difficult options. Apparently, she was recently recommended for promotion, and now she has been asked to exercise the full operational power of an officeholder as a partner. The dilemma, in this case, is choosing what to do, whom to offend, and what values to uphold. The necessity to decide is the most important thing to do in this situation, and it is a very difficult position for Ann. Her partner is adamant, which means she should overlook the guidelines and influence the audit to reflect an outcome that will be good for both her career and the company. But it is despite Ann’s protest that was against the guidelines. Nonetheless, both situations have an impact on her career. Ann has to decide whether she will stick to the auditing guidelines as provided by the PCAOB guidelines or not (Arens et al., 2013). In an ethical situation as the one presented in this case, one can easily make a wrong decision that can affect him or her in the future. Who is affected by the outcome of the dilemma? In these issues, the dilemma will affect two parties, the company, and Ann, the partner responsible for making the audit report look good. If Ann follows the guidelines in general, she will then date the additional information accordingly, and the dates will reflect the actual date when the information was added. However, when she makes such a decision, she will be exposing the entire firm to auditing scrutiny that may expose serious audit deficiencies (Arens et al., 2013). It will affect the firms’ credibility, and the entire company will suffer. As a result, people will be released publicly. Therefore, the firm’s reputation is at stake with regard to the outcomes of this dilemma. On the other hand, if she will follow the instructions her partner suggested, the company’s reputation will be salvaged. Howev