Determinants of asset misappropriation at the workplace: the moderating role of perceived strength of internal controls

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the prevalence of asset misappropriation at the workplace and examines the dominant factors that influence individuals to misappropriate assets at the workplace. Relying on the most recent theory on fraud (the stimulus/pressure, capability, opportunity, rationalization and ego (S.C.O.R.E. model) as the theoretical basis, the study examines the effect of pressure, rationalization, capability, opportunity/strength of internal control system and ego on asset misappropriation at the workplace while controlling for the effect of ethical values. Design/methodology/approach A total of 883 valid responses from individuals working in various organizations in Ghana were collected by means of a self-administered questionnaire. The hypothesized relationships of the study were tested by means of a structural model analysis using the partial least square based structural equation modelling technique. Findings Results from the structural model analysis demonstrate that individuals misappropriate assets at their workplace due to pressures they face, their ability to rationalize their actions as not wrong, their capabilities and their egos. The results, however, indicate that the extent to which an individual will misappropriate asset depends, to a large extent, on the person’s perception of the strength of internal control mechanisms at the workplace. The findings of the study make significant contributions to the fraud discourse. Originality/value Theoretically, the study is among the first to provide empirical support for the applicability of the S.C.O.R.E. model in the fraud literature. Again, this study extends knowledge on occupational fraud literature by examining an area that has received the least research attention: asset misappropriation. The study also highlights the important role of internal controls in reducing the occurrence of asset misappropriation at the workplace.

Examining the predictors of fraud in state-owned enterprises: an application of the fraud triangle theory

“…These theories posit that when individuals are able to justify a fraudulent act prior to execution, the likelihood of them engaging in that act is high as such individuals hold beliefs that necessitate the occurrence of the fraudulent act and alleviates any feeling of guilt. Extant studies provide similar empirical evidence for the positive relationship between rationalization and employee fraud (Ghafoor et al, 2019;Kassem and Higson, 2012;Koomson et al, 2020;Said, Asry, et al, 2018;Kazemian et al, 2019;Vousinas, 2019;Wolfe and Hermanson, 2004).…”

“…Rationalization, therefore, enables perpetuators of fraud to justify their actions to make them acceptable to themselves and protect their belief and self-image as honest, innocent persons who were unfortunate to be caught up in a critical situation and not criminals (Cressey, 1953;. Extant studies provide empirical support for the study's proposition that employees may commit fraud when they are able to provide justifications prior to the occurrence of the fraud to get rid of all feelings of guilt (Koomson et al, 2020). Hence, this study hypothesizes that:…”

Early Warning Of Organizational Ethical Culture In Accounting Fraud

“…Cultural ethics in the organization is a system of values, rules, and beliefs trusted and adhered to by organization members to achieve ethical and superior behaviour and avoid fraudulent actions that can harm the organization [19]. Measurement of organizational culture ethics variables using a Likert scale with an assessment of 1-5.…”

The Urgency of Rationalization for Unethical Behavior and Accounting Fraud

“…The important factor for every single person (employee) in an institution to have unethically is often influenced by the be haviour of the superiors or coworkers and the workplace environment. In addition, em ployees who feel dissatisfied and disappoint ed with what they get can cause of unethical behaviour (Koomson et al 2020;Sharma et al, 2018Syadullah et al, 2019.…”