Prior research in accounting has shown managers may be more likely to make inappropriate decisions when under pressure from their superiors. However, studies from the leadership field show that decision makers may experience alternative forms of influence (such as rational persuasion) and from individuals other than their superiors (such as peers). This study explores the effect of alternative forms and direction of influence on the likelihood that a decision-maker will violate company policy by adding budgetary slack. The authors found that a high number of decision-makers chose to go against policy and add budgetary slack. Furthermore, those who violate company policy once were more likely to do so a second time. However, neither form nor direction of the influence attempt predicted compliance with requests to violate company policy. These findings suggest a need for increased attention to training that more heavily emphasizes reasoning behind company policies, as well as training that heightens managers' awareness of the influence tactics others may use to encourage the violation of such policies. Such training may help encourage adherence to company policies.