再看“职责分离”作为预防性控制活动有效性的数学公式

Matthew T. Stern, Dwayne Powell, R. Knisley
{"title":"再看“职责分离”作为预防性控制活动有效性的数学公式","authors":"Matthew T. Stern, Dwayne Powell, R. Knisley","doi":"10.2308/jfar-2021-017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Barra, Savage, and Im (2020) provide a mathematical model showing separation of duties (SOD) increases fraud, contradicting widespread and long-held beliefs. This paper argues that Barra et al.’s (2020) controversial conclusion relies on unrealistic assumptions. In particular, we object to the assumption that any randomly formed collusion group of the right size can commit fraud. Instead, we argue that a group can only commit fraud if it controls the duties of authorization, record-keeping, and custody of assets. In addition, we argue that assigning equal probabilities to outcomes assumes away the very feature of SOD that decreases fraud risk; namely, SOD adds a point of failure by requiring the fraudster to recruit other employees. We nevertheless show that SOD can increase fraud risk when its implementation requires hiring many new employees. However, other controls can be combined synergistically with SOD to restore its fraud-decreasing ability.","PeriodicalId":149240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Accounting Research","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Second Look at a Mathematical Formulation of the Effectiveness of “Separation of Duties” as a Preventative Control Activity\",\"authors\":\"Matthew T. Stern, Dwayne Powell, R. Knisley\",\"doi\":\"10.2308/jfar-2021-017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Barra, Savage, and Im (2020) provide a mathematical model showing separation of duties (SOD) increases fraud, contradicting widespread and long-held beliefs. This paper argues that Barra et al.’s (2020) controversial conclusion relies on unrealistic assumptions. In particular, we object to the assumption that any randomly formed collusion group of the right size can commit fraud. Instead, we argue that a group can only commit fraud if it controls the duties of authorization, record-keeping, and custody of assets. In addition, we argue that assigning equal probabilities to outcomes assumes away the very feature of SOD that decreases fraud risk; namely, SOD adds a point of failure by requiring the fraudster to recruit other employees. We nevertheless show that SOD can increase fraud risk when its implementation requires hiring many new employees. However, other controls can be combined synergistically with SOD to restore its fraud-decreasing ability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":149240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Forensic Accounting Research\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Forensic Accounting Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2308/jfar-2021-017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Accounting Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/jfar-2021-017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

巴拉(Barra)、萨维奇(Savage)和伊姆(Im)(2020)提供了一个数学模型,显示职责分离(SOD)增加了欺诈行为,这与人们长期以来普遍持有的观点相矛盾。本文认为Barra et al.(2020)有争议的结论依赖于不切实际的假设。特别是,我们反对任何随机形成的适当规模的合谋集团都可能发生欺诈的假设。相反,我们认为,一个集团只有在控制了授权、记录保存和资产保管的职责时,才能实施欺诈。此外,我们认为,为结果分配等概率假设了SOD降低欺诈风险的特征;也就是说,通过要求欺诈者招聘其他员工,SOD增加了一个失败点。然而,我们表明,当SOD的实施需要雇用许多新员工时,它会增加欺诈风险。然而,其他控制可以与SOD协同结合,以恢复其减少欺诈的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Second Look at a Mathematical Formulation of the Effectiveness of “Separation of Duties” as a Preventative Control Activity
Barra, Savage, and Im (2020) provide a mathematical model showing separation of duties (SOD) increases fraud, contradicting widespread and long-held beliefs. This paper argues that Barra et al.’s (2020) controversial conclusion relies on unrealistic assumptions. In particular, we object to the assumption that any randomly formed collusion group of the right size can commit fraud. Instead, we argue that a group can only commit fraud if it controls the duties of authorization, record-keeping, and custody of assets. In addition, we argue that assigning equal probabilities to outcomes assumes away the very feature of SOD that decreases fraud risk; namely, SOD adds a point of failure by requiring the fraudster to recruit other employees. We nevertheless show that SOD can increase fraud risk when its implementation requires hiring many new employees. However, other controls can be combined synergistically with SOD to restore its fraud-decreasing ability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信