Purpose-The purpose of this study is to examine the extent to which accountants, internal auditors, and certified fraud examiners use fraud prevention and detection methods, and their perceptions regarding the effectiveness of these methods. Design/methodology/approach-A survey was administered to 86 accountants, internal auditors and certified fraud examiners. Findings-The results indicate that firewalls, virus and password protection, and internal control review and improvement are quite commonly used to combat fraud. However, discovery sampling, data mining, forensic accountants, and digital analysis software are not often used, despite receiving high ratings of effectiveness. In particular, organizational use of forensic accountants and digital analysis were the least often used of any anti-fraud method but had the highest mean effectiveness ratings. The lack of use of these highly effective methods may be driven by lack of firm resources. Practical implications-Organizations should consider the cost/benefit tradeoff in investing in highly effective but potentially underutilized methods to prevent or detect fraud. While the costs may seem prohibitive for small organizations, substantial cost savings from reduced fraud losses may also be significant. Originality/value-By identifying methods that work well for fraud detection and prevention, prescriptive information can be provided to accounting practitioners, internal auditors, and fraud examiners.

The role of the internal auditor continues to evolve. The recent emphasis on consulting activities has brought new questions and concerns regarding the ability of internal auditors to function in an independent and objective manner. The purpose of this research is to explore whether internal auditors view their consulting role as one in which they are to provide objective feedback to management or one in which they are to provide solutions that they believe are in the best interests of their company. Specifically, we examine whether the internal auditors' judgments are dependent on their company's role (buyer or seller) in an acquisition. Results revealed that the role of the company in the negotiation process did influence judgments. This suggests that internal auditors are likely to assume the position that is in the best interests of their employer. Implications of these results are discussed as are suggested areas for future research.

No abstract

No abstract