skip to main content
10.1145/3535782.3535791acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmsieConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Internal Auditors' Perceptions of Factor Influencing the Effectiveness of Fraud Risk Management in Indonesian Banking Sector

Authors Info & Claims
Published:18 July 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Entering the twentieth century, the number of fraudulent acts has become increasingly diverse. Therefore, fraud has received special attention from various parties because fraudulent acts can harm stakeholders. In Indonesia, the government pays special attention to fraud that occurs in the banking sector. This can be seen from the Financial Services Authority Regulation which contains 4 pillars of anti-fraud strategy for commercial banks. Therefore, this study wants to analyze the perceptions of the internal auditors of the 10 largest banks in Indonesia regarding the factors that affect the effectiveness of Fraud Risk Management. Data on perceptions of the bank's internal auditors were obtained by sending questionnaires via email and social media. From the data obtained, it can be seen that audits, corporate culture, inspections, policies and procedures, as well as IT adoption have a significant influence on the effectiveness of Fraud Risk Management. Meanwhile, the audit committee does not affect the effectiveness of Fraud Risk Management.

References

  1. D. H. Murdock, “Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE),” Audit. Essentials, pp. 7–10, 2018, doi: 10.1201/9781315178141-3.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. RSM, “Training of sports skills (coaching guidance) ". Translated by Mohammad Taghi Aghdasi, first edition, Tabriz University,” 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. PWC, “Fighting fraud : A never-ending battle,” 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Kemenkeu, “APBN 2020,” https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/, 2021. https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/single-page/apbn-2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Kemenkeu.co.id, “Apbn-Kita-Edisi-Desember-2019,” J. Phys. A Math. Theor., vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 1689–1699, 2019, [Online]. Available: https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/media/14005/apbn-kita-edisi-desember-2019.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. F. U. Ulfah, “Kebanyakan Bank di Indonesia Gugur karena Faktor Kecurangan,” finansial.bisnis.com, 2019. https://finansial.bisnis.com/read/20190727/90/1129515/kebanyakan-bank-di-indonesia-gugur-karena-faktor-kecurangan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Tempo, “6 Kasus Pembobolan Rekening Nasabah Bank Sepanjang 2021, Jebol Miliaran Rupiah,” bisnis.tempo.co, 2021. https://bisnis.tempo.co/read/1448803/6-kasus-pembobolan-rekening-nasabah-bank-sepanjang-2021-jebol-miliaran-rupiah.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. OJK, “Surat Edaran Bank Indonesia Nomor 13/28/DPNP,” ojk.go.id, 2011. https://www.ojk.go.id/id/kanal/perbankan/regulasi/surat- edaran-bank-indonesia/Pages/surat-edaran-bank-indonesia-nomor-13-28-dpnp.aspx.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. M. Jensen and W. Meckling, “Theory Of The Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost And Ownership Structure,”Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. https://bungrandhy.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/teori-keagenan-agencytheory/., 1976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. R. E. Freeman, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Marshfield: Pitman Publishing, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. J. Frooman, “Stakeholder influence strategies,” Acad. Manag. Rev., 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. S. Sharma and I. Hanriques, “Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry.,” Strateg. Manag. J., 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. T. Donaldson and L. E. Preston, “The Stakeholder Theory of The Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications.,” Acad. Manag. Rev., 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. D. R. Cressey, Other people's money; a study in the social psychology of embezzlement. Montclair new jersey: Patterson Smith, 1973.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. G. L. Vousinas, “Advancing theory of fraud: The S.C.O.R.E. Model.,” J. Financ. Crime, vol. 26, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. KPMG Forensics, “Fraud Risk Management: Developing a strategy for prevention, detection, and response,” KMPG Cut. through Complex., no. May, pp. 1–57, 2014, [Online]. Available: www.exactech.co.za.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. F. Risk and M. Overview, “Fraud Risk Management,” J. Bus. Manag. Econ., 2015, doi: 10.15520/jbme.2015.vol3.iss2.13.pp14-19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. FCGI, “Definition of Good Corporate Governance,” http: //www.fcgi.or.id, 2006. http: //www.fcgi.or.id.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. KNKG, “Komite Nasional Kebijakan Governance,” Jakarta, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. D. Mangala and P. Kumari, “Auditors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Fraud Prevention and Detection Methods,” 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Y. Muri, Metode Penelitian: Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan Penelitian Gabungan. Jakarta Timur: PerdanaMedia, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. S. Azwar, Metode Penelitian. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Belajar, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Sugiyono, Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. bandung: Alfabeta, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. D. Darmawan, Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya., 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Sugiyono, Metode Penelitian: Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Jakarta Pusat: ALFABETA, cv, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. U. Narimawati, Penulisan Karya Ilmiah: Panduan Awal Menyusun Skripsi dan Tugas Akhir. Jakarta: Penerbit Genesis, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. M. Höck and C. M. Ringle, “Strategic networks in the software industry: An empirical analysis of the value continuum,” IFSAM VIIIth World Congr. (Vol. 28, p. 2010), 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. H. Latan and I. Ghozali, Partial Least Squares Konsep, Teknik dan Aplikasi Menggunakan Program Smart PLS 2.0 M3. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. J. Henseler , “Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann,” Organ. Res. methods, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 182–209, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. I. Ghozali, Structural Equation Modeling, Metode Alternatif dengan Partial Least Square (PLS). Edisi 4. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro., 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. A. U. Zaelani, T. Husain, and A. Budiyantara, “Analisis Simulasi Sistem Penunjang Keputusan: Model Matematis Dengan Pendekatan Goodness-of Fit Berbasis Structural Equation Model,” SMARTICS, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. P. Law, “Corporate governance and no fraud occurrence in organizations: Hong Kong evidence,” Res. gate, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. J. L. Bierstaker, R. G. Brody, and C. Pacini, “Accountants’ perceptions regarding fraud detection and prevention methods,” Manag. Audit. J., 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    MSIE '22: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Management Science and Industrial Engineering
    April 2022
    497 pages
    ISBN:9781450395816
    DOI:10.1145/3535782

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 18 July 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)25
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format