Discourse Fraud Analysis Scoring Matrix v5

	A	B
1	APPENDIX A - VERSION 5
2
3	The ABC Company, Inc.
4	Discourse Fraud Analysis Scoring Matrix
5	(Post interview and analysis)
6	As of May 21, 2018
7
8	Objective:
9	To determine through Discourse Fraud Analysis if the company is at risk for fraudulent activity.
10
11	Source:
12	Executives, management, and employees of the company.
13
14	Scope:
15	Prepare a scoring matrix based on DFA conditions. Each attribute will receive a score of 0, 1, and 2 indicating
16	the likelihood of the company experiencing the condition or not experiencing the condition. A scoring matrix
17	should be prepared for (a) each individual (Individual) and (b) the company itself (Group).
18	Combine the individual scores of the individual with the group’s macro level result.
19	The overall total score will be the total score combined (Individual + Group = Overall).
20
21	Rank the overall scores in descending order.
22
23	ENTER THE FOLLOWING BESIDE EACH STATEMENT:
24	0 = No
25	1 = Could not be determined
26	2 = Yes
27
28	GROUP - MACRO LEVEL QUESTIONS	SCORE
29	Based on observation and inquiry, does the company have power groups?	0
30	Is management abusing the legitimate authority of their positions (legitimate power)?	0
31	Is loyalty to individuals more important than loyalty to rules and policies (referent power)?	0
32	Are experts withholding important information from their employees (expert power)?	0
33	Are rewards and incentives lacking (reward power)?	0
34	Are threats and punishment frequently used (coercive power)?	0
35	Is the tone at the top aggressive?	0
36	Is acceptable behavior not defined and communicated in/by the company?	0
37	Were you unable to socialize and get to know the group?	0
38	Were you unable to determine the ethical values of the group?	0
39	Did you discover any opportunity for collusion?	0
40	Are absolute standards lacking within the company?	0
41	Does the company control employee choices or dictate self-image?	0
42	Do the rule makers in the organization appear to influence behavior?	0
43	Does the C-suite executives’ behavior towards fraud prevention seem to be a low priority?	0
44	Are there any performance based or incentive compensation programs?	0
45	Does the company have creative accounting?	0
46	If you were a fraudster, would you be able to get away with fraud?	0
47	Do the standards of the group not align with the standards of the individual?	0
48	Does it appear the social standards/expectations of the group do not match with the individual's behavior?	0
49	GROUP SUBTOTAL (Total Possible: 40)	0
50
51	INDIVIDUAL - MICRO LEVEL QUESTIONS	SCORE
52	Does it appear this individual is framing his/her words?	0
53	Was it difficult for you to get to know the individual?	0
54	Were you unable to get the person to like you?	0
55	Were you unable to develop trust when interviewing?	0
56	Do you feel you were unable to convey that you are helpful?	0
57	Were you unable to determine the ethical values of the individual?	0
58	Does the person provide lots of details when interviewing?	0
59	Is the person defensive regarding follow-up questions?	0
60	Does the person demonstrate a confident ego?	0
61	Is the person a conversation controller?	0
62	Does the individual appear to need or desire social acceptance?	0
63	Did you discover an attitude of revenge?	0
64	Was the opinion of the individual about the company negative?	0
65	Does this individual have questionable moral fiber?	0
66	Did you experience any difficulty talking to the individual?	0
67	Does this individual have special knowledge to make fraud happen?	0
68	Does the individual demonstrate too much or not enough eye contact when speaking?	0
69	What are the confidence levels in the person’s speech?	0
70	Does it appear this individual considers monetary achievement one of their top life goals?	0
71	Does this individual exhibit ritualistic behavior?	0
72	INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL (Total Possible: 40)	0
73
74	GROUP + INDIVIDUAL TOTAL (Total Possible: 80)	0
75
76	SCORING INDEX
77	65-80 = Extreme Risk
78	47-64 = High Risk
79	24-46 = Moderate Risk
80	0-23 = Low Risk
81
82	Sample Conclusion (High Risk):
83	Based on the scoring matrix results, it appears the company has a high risk of fraudulent activity.
84	A forensic accounting analysis should be performed for the individual(s) and/or group identified as a risk.
85
86	Sample Recommendation:
87	We recommend the following DFA corrective measures to mitigate the fraudulent activity within the organization:
88
89	Please participate in the following survey regarding this instrument:
90	https://form.jotform.com/82036099891971
91
92	We look forward to your feedback in order to make the DFA instrument even more useful.
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100