Storytelling of bureaucratic white-collar crimes in Indonesia: is it a matter of reciprocal norm?

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to contribute to the existing fraud studies and theory (fraud triangle) from bureaucratic crime perspectives. Importantly, this paper answers calls on research, exploring the routines of interaction both micro- and social psychological constructs in studying fraudulent behaviours. These aspects are relatively new, which have a little attention from auditing and fraud literature.Design/methodology/approachExperienced fraud perpetrators were used for this study. A semi-structured interview technique was used, allowing to uncover rich descriptive data on the personal experiences of participants. It allowed them to tell and illustrate why and how they get involved in fraudulent activities.FindingsMany explanations, from a wide variety of perspectives, have been advanced to explain why people commit fraud in bureaucracy. Using reciprocity and exchange theory as a basis, it was found strong evidence for expanding fraud triangle theory (Cressey, 1953) as a predictor of individual’s intention to commit white-collar crimes. Evidence of these results provides a new challenge to other accounts of why systemic fraud would or would not occur. In this point, it highlights the concepts of social exchange and the norm of reciprocity serve as a useful beginning for explaining the factors that cause someone to commit occupational fraud. Generally, a number of distinct empirical and theoretical contributions arise from the current study.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the enrichment of fraud theory and literature, from psychological perspectives. With regard to the reciprocity between peers within and outside organisation, it offers theoretical frameworks about the reasons for the decisions to commit white-collar crimes. As such, it advances fraud and auditing studies.