El rol mediador de la racionalización en la ocurrencia de fraude en las empresas
Resumen
Este estudio explora el fraude como un fenómeno presente dentro del entorno empresarial, destacando su impacto sobre la sostenibilidad organizacional y la confianza pública hacia las empresas. El fraude representa no solo una amenaza económica, sino también un desafío ético y reputacional con amplias implicaciones sociales. Para abordar esta problemática, el estudio aplica la teoría del triángulo del fraude, que identifica la presión, la oportunidad y la racionalización como antecedentes de comportamientos fraudulentos individuales. Metodológicamente, se realizó una encuesta en dos etapas sobre 138 profesionales activos en Colombia. Los datos fueron analizados mediante técnicas de correlación y mediación, utilizando modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Los resultados no respaldan un vínculo entre la presión y el fraude; sin embargo, revelan un efecto de mediación total de la racionalización en la relación causal entre la oportunidad y el fraude. Estos hallazgos resaltan la centralidad de la racionalización en la comprensión de los comportamientos fraudulentos en entornos empresariales, y subrayan la importancia de la educación en ética como mecanismo para frenar comportamientos vinculados a la justificación interna de acciones fraudulentas, con el objetivo de mitigar su futura ocurrencia.
Citas
Campana, P. (2016). When Rationality Fails: Making Sense of the ‘Slippery Slope’ to Corporate Fraud. Theoretical Criminology, 20(3), 322-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480615612147
Cattani, D. (2009). Fraudes corporativistas y apropiación de la riqueza. Convergencia: Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 16(51), 59-84. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1405-14352009000300004&lng=es&nrm=iso
Cohen, J., Ding, Y., Lesage, C., & Stolowy, H. (2010). Corporate Fraud and Managers’ Behavior: Evidence from the Press. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(Suppl 2), 271–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0857-2
Cressey, D.R. (1953). Other People’s Money: A Study of the Social Psychology of Embezzlement. Patterson Smith.
Free, C. (2015). Looking through the fraud triangle: a review and call for new directions. Meditari Accountancy Research, 23(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-02-2015-0009
Goodpaster, K. E. (2017). Teaching and learning ethics by the case method. En The Blackwell Guide to Business Ethics (pp. 117–141). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405164771.ch6
Hair, J.F. (2022). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Harding, T.S., Passow, H. J., Carpenter, D.D., & Finelli, C.J. (2004). An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and professional behavior. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, 46(5), 133-138. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAP.2004.1388860
Hasan, I., Noth, F., & Tonzer, L. (2023). Cultural norms and corporate fraud: Evidence from the Volkswagen scandal. Journal of Corporate Finance, 82(102443), 102443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2023.102443
Hauser, C. (2019). Fighting against corruption: Does anti-corruption training make any difference? Journal of Business Ethics, 159(1), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3808-3
Hidalgo-Fuentes, S., Martínez-Álvarez, I., & Sospedra-Baeza, M. J. (2022). El papel de la Tríada Oscura en la procrastinación académica y la deshonestidad académica. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del comportamiento, 14(3), 32–40. https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v14.n3.32398
Homer, E. M. (2019). Testing the fraud triangle: a systematic review. Journal of Financial Crime, 27(1), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-12-2018-0136
Julián, L., Johari, R.J., Jamaliah, D., & Wondabio, L.S. (2022). Fraud Risk Judgement Measurement Scale Development. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 11(1), 303-311. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv11i1siart10
Koven, S., & Perez, A. (2021, June 28). Corruption and Business Ethics. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.110
Kumar, K., Bhattacharya, S., & Hicks, R.E. (2017). Employee perceptions of organization culture with respect to fraud – where to look and what. Pacific Accounting Review, 30(2), 187-198. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-05-2017-0033
Lin, C.-C., Chiu, A.-A., Huang, S.Y., & Yen, D.C. (2015). Detecting the financial statement fraud: The analysis of the differences between data mining techniques and experts’ judgments. Knowledge-Based Systems, 89, 459-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.08.011
Malau, W. C., Ohalehi, P., Badr, E. S., & Yekini, K. (2021). Fraud interpretation and disclaimer audit opinion: Evidence from the Solomon Islands public sector (SIPS). Managerial Auditing Journal, 36(2), 240–260. https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-04-2018-1867
Mulisa, F., & Ebessa, A. D. (2021). The carryover effects of college dishonesty on the professional workplace dishonest behaviors: A systematic review. Cogent Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2021.1935408
Murphy, P. R., & Dacin, M. T. (2011). Psychological pathways to fraud: Understanding and preventing fraud in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(4), 601–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0741-0
Nohria, N. (2021). What the case study method really teaches. Harvard Business Review, 21. https://hbr.org/2021/12/what-the-case-study-method-really-teaches
Petra, S., & Spieler, A. C. (2020). Accounting scandals: Enron, worldcom, and global crossing. En Corporate Fraud Exposed (pp. 343–360). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Ramos, R., Gonçalves, J., & Gonçalves, S.P. (2020). The Unbearable Lightness of Academic Fraud: Portuguese Higher Education Students’ Perceptions. Education Sciences, 10(12), 351. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120351
Said, J., Alam, M.M., Ramli, M., & Rafidi, M. (2017). Integrating ethical values into fraud triangle theory in assessing employee fraud: Evidence from the Malaysian banking industry. Journal of International Studies, 10(2), 170-184. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2017/10-2/13
Schnatterly, K., Schnatterly, K., & Tuschke, A. (2018). CEO Wrongdoing: A Review of Pressure, Opportunity, and Rationalization. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2405-2432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318771177
Schuchter, A., & Levi, M. (2015). Beyond the Fraud Triangle: Swiss and Austrian Elite Fraudsters. Accounting Forum, 39, 176-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2014.12.001
Shirur, S. (2011). Tunneling vs. agency effect: A case study of enron and satyam. Vikalpa, 36(3), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0256090920110302
Siano, A., Vollero, A., Conte, F., & Amabile, S. (2017). “More than words”: Expanding the taxonomy of greenwashing after the Volkswagen scandal. Journal of Business Research, 71, 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.11.002
Sriyana, J., Prabowo, H.Y., & Syamsudin, M. (2017). Preventing corruption in the Indonesian public sector. European Research Studies Journal, 20(3), 538–553. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/727
Suryani, E., & Fajri, R.R. (2022). Fraud Triangle Perspective: Artificial Neural Network Used in Fraud Analysis. Quality - Access to Success, 23(188), 154–162. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/23.188.22
Yusrianti, H., Ghozali, I., Yuyetta, E., Aryanto, & Meirawati, E. (2020). Financial statement fraud risk factors of fraud triangle: Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Financial Research, 11(4), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v11n4p36
Zulaikha, Z., Ghozali, I., & Hadiprajitno, P. T. (2016). Factors affecting the government procurement fraud: The independent auditor’s point of view. Corporate Board Role Duties and Composition, 12(3), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.22495/cbv12i3art7
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/da2ab/da2ab4712fe8d3242bd41159e66e17423419d795" alt="Creative Commons License"
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.