The ScanEthics fraud prevention methodology is based on extensive studies developed, identifying 7 factors associated with organizational ethical strength aimed at protecting public and private companies against fraud, corruption and employee theft.

Next, we will detail the seven factors considered in the ScanEthics methodology, grouping them into organizational factors, ethical factors and individual economic factors.

Organizational factors 

It is made up of four factors that evidence has validated as correlated with fraud or internal theft in organizations, specifically Perception of Justice and Equity, Engagement, Cooperation and Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Vitality. 

To the extent that the organization presents better indicators in these four factors, it would enhance protection against these crimes. That is, workers, with the perception that they are treated fairly and equitably in the company, with a high level of commitment, job satisfaction and with high energy in their performance, would have a lower probability of participating in fraud or internal theft.

Perception of justice and equity 

Different models highlight the importance of workers' perception of justice when relating to their company. This is relevant when establishing a relationship with fraud and theft, as a consequence of reciprocity or the search for balance in the relationship. In other words, if the worker perceives that he is being treated unfairly, he will seek to equalize the situation through, for example, some counterproductive behavior, such as theft, fraud, sabotage, corruption, lower productivity, etc., in order to seek balance or "revenge".

The organizational factor Perception of Justice and Equity measures the perception of justice and equity in the organization's practices and decisions. 

The perception of justice refers to how employees interpret fairness and impartiality in actions, decisions and processes within the organization. When employees feel that the organization's policies, practices and decisions are fair, they tend to be more committed and motivated. The perception of justice covers areas such as distributive (justice in the distribution of rewards), procedural (justice in decision-making processes) and interactive (justice in social interactions and relationships).

Perceived equity refers to how employees perceive fairness in treatment and opportunities within the organization compared to their colleagues. Equity involves treating employees fairly and providing equal opportunities for development and promotion. The perception of equity influences job satisfaction and the construction of an environment where employees feel valued and recognized for their contributions.

Organizational engagement

Workers who work in a pleasant work environment and feel emotionally committed to the company where they work, undoubtedly, in addition to achieving greater productivity and better performance indicators, this condition would be a solid protector against counterproductive behaviors. Therefore, an organization in which there is a high level of engagement will be less exposed to situations of fraud or internal theft.

The Organizational Engagement factor measures the level of commitment and connection of employees with their work, their team and the organization in general. 

Organizational engagement is the extent to which employees feel emotionally connected to their work and show an active commitment to the organization's objectives and values. It is characterized by an enthusiasm for work, identification with organizational objectives, and a willingness to strive beyond basic expectations. Committed employees not only fulfill their job responsibilities, but also strive to contribute to the success of the organization. Engagement implies a sense of belonging, job satisfaction, and a meaningful connection to the organization's mission and vision.

Cooperation and job satisfaction 

The level of cooperation and job satisfaction act as protective factors against counterproductive behaviors, in particular by promoting positive behaviors that are favorable to organizational objectives. As with the other organizational factors, its incidence is greater in the group at medium risk of participating in counterproductive behaviors, since in some way they are in a susceptible and influenceable situation in the organizational environment. This is not the case for the highest risk group, who, for various reasons, mainly personal, are less susceptible and will look for the opportunity to commit fraud, because they have learned and encrypted behaviors.

The organizational factor Cooperation and Job Satisfaction measures the level of collaboration and satisfaction with the work environment in an organization.  

Cooperation and job satisfaction refer to the willingness and ability of collaborators to work together effectively and the degree of satisfaction they experience in their work environment. Cooperation involves active collaboration, exchange of ideas and synergy between team members. Job satisfaction relates to the degree to which employees find their work rewarding and are happy with their work environment, including factors such as organizational culture, leadership, development opportunities, and compensation.

Vitality 

Organizational energy or vitality is a key component of performance, which combines forces and collaboration, in contrast to the well-identified burnout syndrome or exhaustion syndrome associated with a level of chronic work stress poorly managed in organizational terms. Mainly as a phenomenon, burnout syndrome has been widely investigated in its organizational and behavioral consequences, especially its depersonalization component and its link with counterproductive work behaviors. This exhaustion is associated with learned apathy, which is evidently related to various harmful behaviors.

The Vitality factor measures the level of energy and organizational vitality. It focuses on the vitality and positive energy of employees, controlling the presence of burnout or exhaustion syndrome. 

Burnout syndrome is caused by inadequate management of chronic work stress, characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and lower professional effectiveness. The systematic review of studies on the relationship between work ethic and burnout syndrome has found the existence of a negative correlation between both. That is, organizations with ethical strength would present lower levels of exhaustion in their employees, and vice versa.

Ethical factors

Ethical factors are presented as complements to organizational aspects, which suggest that a positive work environment would protect organizations against fraud and other counterproductive behaviors. Extensive research, as has been documented, accounts for this influence.

These ethical factors are associated with aspects directly linked to manifestations of counterproductive behaviors. Applying sanctions, tolerance, control systems, ethical training, reporting channels, management commitment, etc. They are projected onto workers, favoring or discouraging ethical behavior.

According to the factor analysis developed, we were able to identify two factors specific to this area of ​​action, ethical communication and the perception of general integrity.

Ethical communication 

The way in which ethical behavior is reinforced in organizations is key to giving signals to workers about its importance for management, and must be complemented with clear behavioral codes, real sanctions and regular behavioral reinforcement, involving management or supervision. direct. Undoubtedly, the management's actions in a negligent, tolerant, ambiguous and absent manner, with respect to fraud, internal theft and corruption, would generate in the organization a kind of breeding ground for their promotion.

Ethical Communication refers to the effectiveness and coherence of the messages transmitted in the organization in relation to the importance of honesty, the application of sanctions for dishonest behavior, and the existence of internal control systems. It involves clarity and consistency in promoting ethical standards and communicating the consequences associated with dishonest behavior.

This factor investigates how the relevance assigned to ethics is perceived by the organization from a purely communicational aspect, that is, it measures the workers' perception of management's actions in this matter, and the associated sanctions. in order to reduce the probability of fraud within it.

A large study of ethical violations found that the best way to curb counterproductive behavior was through better communication, open dialogue, and serious management commitment to managing counterproductive behavior.

Overall Integrity 

In all human interaction, the influence of peers and the environment are relevant to behavior. To the extent that a high permissiveness, absence of internal controls, ease of committing fraud and generalization of this behavior in third parties is perceived, there would evidently be a kind of criminogenic contagion against which fraud and internal theft would be normalized, coming to accept them as legitimate and normal behaviors. Obviously this situation refers to an extreme situation, however, it reflects a situation in which there must be clear guidelines to deal with.

Regular ScanEthics-type studies are essential to know beyond the information that management receives in its regular reports. Knowing fraud situations directly from workers makes it possible to have sensitive and key information to effectively combat these counterproductive behaviors. ScanEthics includes a direct reporting channel that encourages each worker to detail situations of fraud or theft that occur daily.

The General Integrity factor measures the commitment of the organization and its members to ethical conduct and consistency in the application of these standards in the organization. This factor measures how widespread ethical behavior would be in the organization and the perceived commitment of management to reinforce it, promote it, and sanction non-compliance. That an organization has a high level of general integrity implies that the majority of its collaborators operate ethically, that there are solid preventive and control models, and that drastic and exemplary sanctions are applied for those who violate the trust placed. 

This factor is relevant, in particular, for those collaborators who are hesitant about some illegitimate behavior, since the generalized feeling of impunity could be a triggering factor, as well as the generalization of dishonest behavior. In this way, knowing the collaborators' perception of the level of general integrity allows defining actions aimed at directly affecting the probability of fraud or internal theft in organizations.

Economic factors

A third area of ​​factors is associated with individual economic requirements, which according to evidence has been linked to the presence of fraud within organizations and must be included in the model.

Personal economic balance

The Personal Economic Balance factor measures the level of adjustment between individual income and expenses. In the context of organizational ethics and the reduction of internal fraud risks, this factor has been identified as necessary to monitor since it has been shown to be a possible trigger for fraud. 

Personal financial balance refers to the effective management of individual financial resources, where income and expenses are balanced so that a sustainable standard of living can be maintained. This concept implies a person's ability to manage their finances responsibly. Maintaining a personal financial balance contributes to financial stability and can have positive effects on mental health and work productivity.

In the organizational context, attention to the personal financial balance of employees can be relevant because personal financial concerns can affect job performance and work ethics. Employees facing significant financial difficulties may be more inclined to engage in fraudulent or ethically questionable behavior to address their financial problems.

Synthesis

These seven factors allow for a comprehensive diagnosis of the level of ethical strength existing in an organization in order to program actions to strengthen and promote ethical conduct as well as corrective actions according to the results achieved.

The relevance lies in allowing a detailed understanding of the impact of organizational factors on fraud and being able to intervene in a timely manner. It is worth mentioning that the seven factors have validity and reliability, also supported by previous studies, based on various analyses, highlighting the factor analysis, which provides solidity to the model executed and presented.

A measurement instrument limited to forty-eight items was developed, as part of a comprehensive analysis of ethics from the perspective of the workers involved, providing essential and valuable information on the exact improvements to be implemented.

ScanEthics provides a final score called SE Index, which allows synthesizing the diagnosis made in each work area. Likewise, the report provided includes the analysis of six open questions, examined with artificial intelligence, aimed at identifying risk area conditions, specific fraud or theft situations, suggestions for improving preventive work and opening specific complaints.

The qualitative report allows you to complement the analysis, providing sensitive information on fraud. While it is true that many companies have institutional reporting channels, these have very limited results. ScanEthics, when applied online, allows for a personnel census application, enabling specific complaints to be provided anonymously.