Antecedents of corruption in the perspective of local government employees: A fraud hexagon theory approach
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/pmf.14(1).2025.09
-
Article InfoVolume 14 2025, Issue #1, pp. 106-116
- 10 Views
-
2 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
The purpose of this study is to analyze the factors that influence the occurrence of accounting fraud in local governments using the fraud hexagon theory. This study focused on Enrekang Regency government employees in South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia. Data were collected by distributing questionnaires to financial managers in 38 offices, agencies, and divisions. Then, using the purposive sampling method, 157 local government employees were selected for the study. Data were analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis via SPSS version 23 software. The results showed that pressure, collusion, opportunity, and rationalization have a significant positive impact on corruption (β = 0.480, p-value 0.000 < 0.05; β = 0.211, p-value 0.001 < 0.05; β = 0.511, p-value 0.000 < 0.05; β = 0.133, p-value 0.020 < 0.05, respectively). Capability has an insignificant impact on corruption (β = 0.021, p-value 0.643 < 0.05), while arrogance has a significant negative impact on corruption (β = –0.229, p-value 0.004 < 0.05). The study offers implications for academics as the findings can be used as an additional reference for research in the field of fraud hexagon and corruption. The research results can contribute to theory development, particularly those related to fraud theory, as well as add empirical evidence in accounting research studies, particularly in terms of factors that influence corruption.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M41, M48, H83
-
References55
-
Tables4
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Descriptive statistical analysis
- Table 2. Reliability testing results
- Table 3. Classical assumption testing results
- Table 4. Hypothesis testing results (t-test)
-
- Affandi, A., Hakim, T. I. R., & Prasetyono, P. (2022). Dimensi Fraud Hexagon Dan Spiritualitas Pada Kecurangan Akademik Selama Pembelajaran Daring [Fraud Hexagon Dimensions and Spirituality on Academic Cheating During Online Learning]. InFestasi, 18(1). (In Indonesian).
- Albretch, W. S., Albretch, C. O., Albretch, C. C., & Zimbelman, M. F. (2012). Fraud examination (4th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.
- Anindya, J. R., & Adhariani, D. (2019). Fraud risk factors and tendency to commit fraud: analysisof employees’ perceptions. International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 35(4), 545-557.
- Apriani, U. (2020). Pengaruh Komponen-Komponen Fraud Star Terhadap Korupsi Dengan Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah (Spip) Sebagai Variabel Moderasi [The Effect of Fraud Star Components on Corruption with the Government Internal Control System (SPIP) as a Moderating Variable]. Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti- Journal of Master of Accounting Trisakti, 7(1), 1-24. (In Indonesian).
- Apsari, A. K., & Suhartini, D. (2021). Religiosity as Moderating of Accounting Student Academic Fraud with a Hexagon Theory Approach. Accounting and Finance Studies, 1(3), 211-230.
- Cressey, D. (1953). Other people’s money: A Study in the social psychology of embezzlement. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
- Desviana, D., Basri, Y. M., & Nasrizal, N. (2020). Analisis Kecurangan pada Pengelolaan Dana Desa dalam Perspektif Fraud Hexagon [Analysis of Fraud in Village Fund Management from the Fraud Hexagon Perspective]. Studi Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia- Indonesian Accounting and Finance Studies, 3(1), 50-73. (In Indonesian).
- Estikasari, I. P., & Adi, P. H. (2019). Ketaatan Akuntansi, Kontrol Atasan, Budaya Etis Organisasi, Penegakan Hukum dan Kecurangan Akuntansi [Accounting Adherence, Superior Control, Organizational Ethical Culture, Law Enforcement and Accounting Fraud]. JRAP (Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Perpajakan)- Journal of Accounting and Taxation Research, 6(02), 1-12. (In Indonesian).
- Fadersair, K., & Subagyo, S. (2019). Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa Akuntansi: Dimensi Fraud Pentagon (Studi Kasus Pada Mahasiswa Prodi Akuntansi Ukrida) [Academic Cheating Behavior of Accounting Students: Dimensions of the Fraud Pentagon (Case Study on Ukrida Accounting Study Program Students)]. Jurnal Akuntansi Bisnis- Journal of Business Accounting, 12(2), 122-147. (In Indonesian).
- Fauzia, F. N., Pujiningsih, S., & Makaryanawati. (2022). Determinants of Fraudulent Tendencies on Public Accountancy in Indonesia. Oblik i Finansi, 4(98), 13-22.
- Ghozali, I. (2018). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program IBM SPSS 25 [Application of Multivariate Analysis with IBM SPSS 25 Program]. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro- Semarang: Diponegoro University Publishing House. (In Indonesian).
- Gorsira, M., Steg, L., Denkers, A., & Huisman, W. (2018). Corruption in organizations: Ethical climate and individual motives. Administrative Sciences, 8(1), 4.
- Graycar, A., & Sidebottom, A. (2012). Corruption and control: A corruption reduction approach. Journal of Financial Crime, 19(4), 384-399.
- Green, S. G., & Mitchell, T. R. (1979). Attributional processes of leaders in leader–member interactions. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 23(3), 429-458.
- Handoko, B. L., & Tandean, D. (2021). An Analysis of Fraud Hexagon in Detecting Financial Statement Fraud (Empirical Study of Listed Banking Companies on Indonesia Stock Exchange for Period 2017 – 2019). In 2021 7th International Conference on E-Business and Applications (ICEBA 2021) (pp. 93-100).
- Hastuti, A. T. A., & Wiratno, A. (2020). Pengaruh budaya organisasi, tekanan, kesempatan, dan rasionalisasi terhadap perilaku korupsi [The influence of organizational culture, pressure, opportunity, and rationalization on corruption behavior]. Jurnal Ekonomi, Bisnis, dan Akuntansi – Journal of Economics, Business, and Accounting, 22(2), 113-123. (In Indonesian).
- Hernanda, B. P., Puspita, D. A., & Sudarno, S. (2020). Analisis fraud diamond theory terhadap terjadinya fraud (Studi empiris pada Dinas Kota Probolinggo) [Fraud diamond theory analysis of fraud occurrence (Empirical study at Probolinggo City Office)]. E-Journal Ekonomi Bisnis dan Akuntansi – E-Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting, 7(1). (In Indonesian).
- Hormati, G. A., & Pesudo, D. A. A. (2019). Pengaruh Tekanan, Kesempatan, Rasionalisasi Dan Kemampuan Terhadap Kecenderungan Aparatur Sipil Negara Dalam Melakukan Kecurangan Akuntansi Studi Empiris Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah Kabupaten Bolaang Mongondow Timur [The Influence of Pressure, Opportunity, Rationalization and Ability on the Tendency of State Civil Apparatus in Committing Accounting Fraud Empirical Study of Regional Work Units of East Bolaang Mongondow Regency]. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Dan Humanika – Scientific Journal of Accounting and Humanities, 9(2), 172-190. (In Indonesian).
- Horwath, C. (2011). The mind behind the fraudsters crime: Key behavioral and environmental element. USA: Crowe Horwath International.
- Huefner, R. J. (2010). Local government fraud: The Roslyn School District case. Management Research Review, 33(3), 198-209.
- Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2020). Tren penindakan kasus korupsi tahun 2019 [Trends in corruption case prosecution in 2019]. Indonesia Corruption Watch. (In Indonesian).
- Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2021). Kinerja penindakan kasus korupsi 2020 [Corruption case enforcement performance 2020]. Indonesia Corruption Watch. (In Indonesian).
- Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2022). Hasil pemantauan tren penindakan kasus korupsi tahun 2021 [Results of monitoring trends in corruption case action in 2021]. Indonesia Corruption Watch. (In Indonesian).
- Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2023). Laporan hasil pemantauan tren penindakan korupsi tahun 2022 [Report on the results of monitoring trends in corruption eradication in 2022]. Indonesia Corruption Watch. (In Indonesian).
- Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 192-238.
- Koomson, T. A. A., Owusu, G. M. Y., Bekoe, R. A., & Oquaye, M. (2020). Determinants of asset misappropriation at the workplace: The moderating role of perceived strength of internal controls. Journal of Financial Crime, 27(4), 1191-1211.
- Kumar, K., Bhattacharya, S., & Hicks, R. (2018). Employee perceptions of organization culture with respect to fraud – Where to look and what to look for. Pacific Accounting Review, 30(2), 187-198.
- Mackevičius, J., & Giriūnas, L. (2013). Transformational research of the fraud triangle. Ekonomika, 92(4), 150-163.
- Meidijati, M., & Amin, M. N. A. (2022). Detecting Fraudulent Financial Reporting Through Hexagon Fraud Model: Moderating Role of Income Tax Rate. International Journal of Social and Management Studies (IJOSMAS), 3(2), 311-322.
- Omar, M., Nawawi, A., & Salin, A. S. A. P. (2016). The causes, impact and prevention of employee fraud: A case study of an automotive company. Journal of Financial Crime, 23(4), 1012-1027.
- Omar, N. B., & Din, H. F. M. (2010). Fraud diamond risk indicator: An assessment of its importance and usage. International Conference on Science and Social Research (pp. 607-612). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
- Omukaga, K. O. (2021). Is the fraud diamond perspective valid in Kenya? Journal of Financial Crime, 28(3), 810-840.
- Owusu, E. K., Chan, A. P. C., & Shan, M. (2019). Causal factors of corruption in construction project management: An overview. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(1), 1-31.
- Owusu, G. M. Y., Koomson, T. A. A., Alipoe, S. A., & Kani, Y. A. (2022). Examining the predictors of fraud in state-owned enterprises: An application of the fraud triangle theory. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 25(2), 427-444.
- Pamungkas, I., & Utomo, S. (2018). Fraudulent financial reporting: An application of fraud pentagon theory to association of Southeast Asian Nations corporate governance scorecard. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 9(5), 1729-1737.
- Prabowo, H. Y. (2016). Sight beyond sight: Foreseeing corruption in the Indonesian government through behavioral analysis. Journal of Financial Crime, 23(2), 289-316.
- Priyastiwi, P., & Setyowati, H. (2021). Kecenderungan kecurangan pada alokasi dana desa: Analisis fraud diamond dan religiusitas [Fraud tendency in village fund allocation: Analysis of diamond fraud and religiosity]. Kajian Bisnis Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Widya Wiwaha – Business Studies, Widya Wiwaha College of Economics, 30(1), 1-14.
- Robbins, S., & Judge. (2009). Perilaku organisasi [Organizational behavior]. Jakarta: Salemba Empat. (In Indonesian).
- Ruankaew, T. (2016). Beyond the fraud diamond. International Journal of Business Management & Economic Research, 7(1), 474-476.
- Rustiarini, N., Sutrisno, T., Nurkholis, N., & Andayani, W. (2019). Why people commit public procurement fraud? The fraud diamond view. Journal of Public Procurement, 19(4), 345-362.
- Sahla, W. A., & Ardianto, A. (2023). Ethical values and auditors fraud tendency perception: Testing of fraud pentagon theory. Journal of Financial Crime, 30(4), 966-982.
- Said, J., Alam, M., Karim, Z., & Johari, R. (2018). Integrating religiosity into fraud triangle theory: Findings on Malaysian police officers. Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice, 4(2), 111-123.
- Sarikhani, M., & Ebrahimi, F. (2022). Whistleblowing by accountants: An integration of the fraud pentagon and the extended theory of planned behavior. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(6), 1740-1763.
- Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach (7th ed.). New Jersey: Wiley.
- Situngkir, N. C., & Triyanto, D. N. (2020). Detecting fraudulent financial reporting using fraud score model and fraud pentagon theory: Empirical study of companies listed in the LQ 45 Index. The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research, 23(3), 373-410.
- Sugiyono. (2013). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D [Quantitative, Qualitative and R&D Research Methods]. Bandung: Alfabeta.
- Suhardjanto, D., Djuminah, D., & Agustiningsih, S. W. (2020). Regional financial performance, audit function, and corruption levels in Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 20(1), 81-90.
- Suryana, A., & Sadeli, D. (2015). Analisis Faktor - Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Terjadinya Fraud [Analysis of Factors Affecting the Occurrence of Fraud]. JRAP (Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Perpajakan)- Journal of Accounting and Taxation Research, 2(02), 127-138. (In Indonesian).
- Suryandari, E., & Valentin, L. (2021). Determinan fraud dana desa: Pengujian elemen fraud hexagon, machiavellian, dan love of money [Determinants of village fund fraud: Testing the hexagon, machiavellian, and love of money fraud elements]. Reviu Akuntansi dan Bisnis Indonesia – Indonesian Accounting and Business Review, 5(1), 55-78. (In Indonesian).
- Suryani, E., & Fajri, R. R. (2022). Fraud triangle perspective: Artificial neural network used in fraud analysis. Quality-Access to Success, 23(188), 154-162.
- Theotama, G., Waskita, Y. D., & Hapsari, A. N. S. (2023). Fraud hexagon in the motives to commit academic fraud [Fraud hexagon in the motives to commit academic fraud]. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis – Journal of Economics and Business, 26(1), 195-220. (In Indonesian).
- Tuanakotta, T. M. (2010). Akuntansi forensik dan audit investigatif [Forensic accounting and investigative auditing]. Lembaga Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia: Jakarta. (In Indonesian).
- Vousinas, G. L. (2019). Advancing theory of fraud: The S.C.O.R.E. model. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(1), 372-381.
- Yap, J. B. H., Lee, K. Y., & Skitmore, M. (2020). Analysing the causes of corruption in the Malaysian construction industry. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 18(6), 1823-1847.
- Zuberi, O., & Mzenzi, S. I. (2019). Analysis of employee and management fraud in Tanzania. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(2), 412-431.