Looking Through the Fraud Triangle: A Review and Call for New Directions

37 Pages Posted: 7 Apr 2015

See all articles by Clinton Free

Clinton Free

UNSW Australia Business School, School of Accounting

Date Written: April 6, 2015

Abstract

Purpose: This article reviews popular frameworks used to examine fraud and earmarks three areas where there is considerable scope for academic research to guide and inform important debates within organisations and regulatory bodies.

Design/methodology/approach: The article reviews published fraud research in the fields of auditing and forensic accounting, focusing on the development of the dominant framework in accounting and fraud examination, the fraud triangle. From this review, specific avenues for future research are identified.

Findings: Three under-researched issues are identified: (1) rationalisation of fraudulent behaviours by offenders; (2) the nature of collusion in fraud; and (3) regulatory attempts to promote whistle-blowing. These topics highlight the perspective of those directly involved in fraud and draw together issues that have interested researchers in other disciplines for decades with matters that are at the heart of contemporary financial management across the globe.

Originality/value: In spite of the profound economic and reputational impact of fraud, research in accounting remains fragmented and emergent. This review identifies avenues offering scope to bridge the divide between academia and practice.

Keywords: Fraud triangle; Rationalisation; Collusion; Whistle-blowing; Regulation

JEL Classification: M40

Suggested Citation

Free, Clinton Wallace, Looking Through the Fraud Triangle: A Review and Call for New Directions (April 6, 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2590952 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2590952

Clinton Wallace Free (Contact Author)

UNSW Australia Business School, School of Accounting ( email )

Sydney, NSW 2052
Australia

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
494
Abstract Views
2,145
rank
58,277
PlumX Metrics