Measuring Fraud Prevention Performance.
Human development in countering fraud and corruption, is a key to success?
.Do you look at your performance in proactively mitigating corruption risk
To better identify and mitigate corruption
Answer these 3 questions.
- Do you have the correct levels of expertise?
- Do you have adequate capabilities?
- Is there continual professional training and development?
Take a look at your organisation right now.
Do you have adequate expertise?
This can be both professional and anti-corruption expertise.
Consider this case example.
A clients approach to procurement was that the main departments
would conduct their own procurement and the small
procurement department would oversee the
high value procurement or projects.
The departments didn’t have procurement expertise and there was consistent non-compliance with procedure.
They had significant corruption risk
Ask questions to identifying gaps in
- current capability, roles and responsibilities
- that may have an impact on the counter fraud culture
- operational or risk mitigation activities.
Are capabilities adequate in high risk departments
Consider this case example.
A client with a high volume of procurement had the reciprocal
high volume of invoices. The finance department didn’t
have the time or expertise to verify that services
were provided
Numerous fictitious requirements and false invoices were created by insiders
The answer to this problem:
- Verify whether finance departments are able to verify that goods, works or services were provided before payment
- Capabilities such as data analysis and audit are used to identify patterns of risk
- that there are adequate resources in these key areas.
Ongoing professional training and development
To help introduce a risk identification and mitigation approach
- are staff adequately trained in their own profession e.g. finance and procurement
- do they have procurement fraud and corruption knowledge
- to better identify risks, the false invoice and the fictitious requirement.
Do you have adequate levels of expertise to mitigate fraud and corruption?
What resource challenges do you find in your approach?