Mapping Fraud in community sports: the development of a new measure

Abstract

Title of abstract Mapping Fraud in community sports: the development of a new measure Keywords Fraud; sport fraud; organizational fraud triangle; measure development; organizational culture; leadership; ethics programs Summary of abstract To date, no validated scale exists for the measurement of observed frequency of fraud nor sport fraud. The aim of this study is to develop a scale for measuring fraud in non-profit sport clubs. Existing scales for measuring unethical behavior (Kaptein, 2008; Lasthuizen, Huberts, & Heres, 2011) and (sport) fraud typologies (ACFE, 2020, 2022; Council of Europe, 2020) serve as conceptual bases for the development of the new instrument. Abstract (results, discussion, implications, discussion) The dark number of fraud in sports – the number of unregistered fraud cases – is estimated to be 90% of the total fraud cases in sports (Andreff, 2019). Fraudulent practices are detrimental for the functioning of community sports clubs, as fraud negatively influences future allocations, credibility, reputation and resources. Both the non-profit sector as the sport sector are characterized by a series of peculiarities that increase their fraud vulnerability. This study sheds light on the observed fraud frequency in community sports in relation to three core organizational processes in sport clubs. Likewise, this study meets the need for more insight into organizational fraud antecedents, as fraud research is remarkably focused on individual level explanations. Drawing from the Organizational Fraud Triangle (OFT) (Free, 2015), the three organizational components are (1) organizational culture, mapped by the Corporate Ethical Virtues Model Scale – Short Form (CEVMS-SF) (De Bode, Armenakis, Feild, & Walker, 2013), (2) ethical leadership for which we use the Ethical Leadership Questionnaire (ELQ) (Yukl, Mahsud, Hassan, & Prussia, 2013) and (3) management controls. However, a problem arises when trying to conceptualize the dependent variable. To date, no scale exists for measuring observed frequency of (sport) fraud. This research aims to counter this gap in literature by developing a new measuring instrument. The new scale finds its foundation in existing scales for unethical behavior and integrity violations (Kaptein, 2008; Lasthuizen et al., 2011) as well as in (sport) fraud typologies (ACFE, 2020, 2022; Council of Europe, 2020). The scale is still being developed. In a first phase, items were generated on the basis of a thorough literature study. Once initial item generation was completed, the questionnaire was presented to two focus groups. A first focus group consisted of internal experts – Ghent University and KU Leuven professors, post-doctoral researchers and doctoral students – who were selected on the basis of their academic expertise in areas related to fraud, criminology and sport management. Once adapted and approved, the questionnaire was presented to a second focus group, consisting of practitioners (i.e. federation managers, board members of sport clubs, athletes and fraud auditors). Checked matters were the intelligibility of the scale and whether the items correspond to the reality of the practitioners. The scale consists of 37 items spread over two dimensions and six categories. A 5-point Likert scale model is adopted. The first dimension of ‘fraud’ in non-profits consists of three categories: (1) corruption, (2) asset misappropriation and (3) financial statement fraud. The ‘sport fraud’ dimension consists of (4) direct interference in the natural course of a sporting event or competition, (5) modification of an athlete’s identity or personal information and (6) modification that is non-compliant with criminal laws or sport rules relating to playing surfaces, equipment, athlete physiology or sporting venues. In the coming period, the scale will be tested and distributed among Belgian sport clubs. We will be able to provide more information on the scale as well as our first results by the time of the congress. References ACFE. (2020). Report to the Nations. 2020 Global Study on Occupational Fraud and Abuse. Retrieved from https://acfepublic.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/2020-Report-to-the-Nations.pdf ACFE. (2022). Fraud Tree. Retrieved from https://www.acfe.com/fraud-tree.aspx#publications Andreff, W. (2019). An Economic Roadmap to the Dark Side of Sport: Springer. Council of Europe. (2020). Typology of Sports Manipulations - Resource Guide. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/sport/typology De Bode, J. D., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H., & Walker, A. G. (2013). Assessing ethical organizational culture: Refinement of a Scale. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49(4), 460-484. Free, C. (2015). Looking through the fraud triangle: a review and call for new directions. Meditari Accountancy Research, 23(2), 175-196. Kaptein, M. (2008). Developing a Measure of Unethical Behavior in the Workplace: A Stakeholder Perspective. 34, 978-1008. doi:10.1177/0149206308318614 Lasthuizen, K., Huberts, L., & Heres, L. (2011). How to Measure Integrity Violations: Towards a validated typology of unethical behavior. Public Management Review, 13, 383-408. doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.553267 Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., Hassan, S., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). An Improved Measure of Ethical Leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(1)