IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joaced/v60y2022ics0748575122000318.html

Under the Radar: A conversation about evidence circumvention, manipulation, and fabrication

Author

Listed:
  • Herron, Eddward T.
  • Shough, Evan
  • Smith, J. Alexander

Abstract

This case story is based on a real conversation between two auditors as one wrestles with the idea of leaving their job and trying to commit their own fraud. This case can be used to initiate discussion of strengths and weaknesses of audit evidence, explore the components of the Fraud Triangle along with other factors and discuss the ethical dilemmas that many may face in their professional careers. The story highlights the ethical dilemma and the rationalization process of one party while also discussing their perceived ability to commit a crime and cover it up. As the two experienced auditors discuss the scheme, they discuss the very real weaknesses in how auditors perform their tasks and how audit evidence can be manipulated and circumvented by capable and determined parties. The epilogue of this story contains a further discussion of other unintended consequences of choosing a life of deception and fraud.

Suggested Citation

  • Herron, Eddward T. & Shough, Evan & Smith, J. Alexander, 2022. "Under the Radar: A conversation about evidence circumvention, manipulation, and fabrication," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joaced:v:60:y:2022:i:c:s0748575122000318
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jaccedu.2022.100797
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748575122000318
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2022.100797?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ken T. Trotman & Roger Simnett & Amna Khalifa, 2009. "Impact of the Type of Audit Team Discussions on Auditors' Generation of Material Frauds," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 1115-1142, December.
    2. Zimbelman, MF, 1997. "The effects of SAS no. 82 on auditors' attention to fraud risk factors and audit planning decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35, pages 75-97.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Herron, Eddward T. & Cornell, Robert M., 2021. "Creativity amidst standardization: Is creativity related to auditors’ recognition of and responses to fraud risk cues?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 314-326.
    2. Dennis, Sean A. & Johnstone, Karla M., 2018. "A natural field experiment examining the joint role of audit partner leadership and subordinates’ knowledge in fraud brainstorming," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 14-28.
    3. Smith, Deborah Drummond & Gleason, Kimberly C. & Kannan, Yezen H., 2021. "Auditor liability and excess cash holdings: Evidence from audit fees of foreign incorporated firms," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Karim Jamal, 2008. "Mandatory Audit of Financial Reporting: A Failed Strategy for Dealing with Fraud," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 97-110, May.
    5. Dierynck, Bart & Kadous, Kathryn & Peters, Christian P. H., 2024. "Learning in the auditing profession: A framework and future directions," Other publications TiSEM eb74c8e4-bc4a-4b71-b88a-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Chen, Qiu & Kelly, Khim & Salterio, Steven E., 2012. "Do changes in audit actions and attitudes consistent with increased auditor scepticism deter aggressive earnings management? An experimental investigation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 95-115.
    7. Trotman, Ken T. & Bauer, Tim D. & Humphreys, Kerry A., 2015. "Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 56-72.
    8. Wei Chen & Amna Saeed Khalifa & Kate L Morgan & Ken T Trotman, 2018. "The effect of brainstorming guidelines on individual auditors’ identification of potential frauds," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 43(2), pages 225-240, May.
    9. Ikhlas Hentati-Klila & Saida Dammak-Barkallah & Habib Affes, 2017. "Do auditors’ perceptions actually help fight against fraudulent practices? Evidence from Tunisia," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 21(3), pages 715-735, September.
    10. Monica Ramos Montesdeoca & Agustín J. Sánchez Medina & Felix Blázquez Santana, 2019. "Research Topics in Accounting Fraud in the 21st Century: A State of the Art," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-31, March.
    11. Carolyn Mactavish & Susan McCracken & Regan N. Schmidt, 2018. "External Auditors' Judgment and Decision Making: An Audit Process Task Analysis," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 387-426, September.
    12. Tim D. Bauer & Sean M. Hillison & Mark E. Peecher & Bradley Pomeroy, 2020. "Revising Audit Plans to Address Fraud Risk: A Case of “Do as I Advise, Not as I Do”?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 2558-2589, December.
    13. Arzhenovskiy S.V. & Bakhteev A.V. & Sinyavskaya T.G. & Hahonova N.N., 2019. "Audit Risk Assessment Model," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(Special 1), pages 74-85.
    14. Waller, William S. & Zimbelman, Mark F., 2003. "A cognitive footprint in archival data: Generalizing the dilution effect from laboratory to field settings," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 254-268, July.
    15. Popoola, Oluwatoyin Muse Johnson & Che-Ahmad, Ayoib & Samsudin, Rose Shamsiah, 2014. "Impact of Task Performance Fraud Risk Assessment on Forensic Skills and Mindsets: Experience from Nigeria," MPRA Paper 66700, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2014.
    16. Power, Michael, 2013. "The apparatus of fraud risk," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 525-543.
    17. Daniel Aobdia & Luminita Enache & Anup Srivastava, 2021. "Changes in Big N auditors’ client selection and retention strategies over time," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 715-754, February.
    18. Haapamäki, Elina & Sihvonen, Jukka, 2019. "Research on International Standards on Auditing: Literature synthesis and opportunities for future research," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 37-56.
    19. Dierynck, Bart & Kadous, Kathryn & Peters, Christian P.H., 2024. "Learning in the auditing profession: A framework and future directions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    20. William Kerler & Larry Killough, 2009. "The Effects of Satisfaction with a Client’s Management During a Prior Audit Engagement, Trust, and Moral Reasoning on Auditors’ Perceived Risk of Management Fraud," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 109-136, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joaced:v:60:y:2022:i:c:s0748575122000318. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-accounting-education .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.