References

ⁱ The International Public Sector Fraud Forum (IPSFF) currently consists of representatives from organisations in the governments of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. The collective aim of the Forum is to come together to share best and leading practice in fraud management and control across public borders.

ⁱⁱ Element 4, Commonwealth Risk Management Policy | Department of Finance

ⁱⁱⁱ Incentives: The Hidden Forces That Shape Behavior

^iv Wells Fargo and the Problem with Incentives | Transparency International UK

^v https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0011128718763136

^vi This is based on rational choice theory, which suggests people weigh costs and benefits before acting, even for crimes. This is not universal however – e.g. addiction-driven crimes, where desperation or withdrawal can override clear-headed math.

^vii Cohen, Lawrence & Felson, Marcus. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review. 44. 10.2307/2094589.

^viii Eck J (1994). Drug markets and drug places: A case-control study of the spatial structure of illicit drug dealing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.

^ix Paulhus, Williams (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality: The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy - ScienceDirect

^x Boddy C (2024). Fraud and Corporate Psychopaths: Current Knowledge and Propositions for Further Research. Journal of Economic Criminology: Fraud and corporate psychopaths: The proposition for reintroducing personality traits of the economic crime offender - ScienceDirect

^xi Fact sheet: Pro-integrity culture | Australian Public Service Commission

^xii Adapted from the Government Counter Fraud Profession Standards and Guidance - Standard for Counter Fraud Culture Practitioners - GOV.UK

^xiii Sharing the principles of co-design | by Emma Blomkamp | Medium

^xiv UK Design Council’s Double Diamond design process: Framework for Innovation - Design Council

^xv GCF Professional Standards and Guidance: Fraud Prevention, C17. Stakeholders 

^xvi Adapted from Evaluating Internal Control Systems, The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation, 2014, pp. 21 23 and Canada Revenue Agency’s Risk Exposure and Tolerance Assessment tool. 

^xvii UK Government Counter Fraud Professional Standards and Guidance: Fraud Prevention, C21. Measure, Monitor and Evaluate Effectiveness 

^xviii Evaluating Internal Control Systems, The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation, 2014, p. 20 

^xix Guide to Understanding the Total Impacts of Fraud, International Public Sector Fraud Forum, 2020 

^xx Evaluating Internal Control Systems, The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation, 2014, p. 44 

^xxi Evaluating Internal Control Systems, The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation, 2014, p. 43 

^xxii GCF Professional Standards and Guidance: Fraud Prevention, C14. Prevention Methodologies 

^xxiii Keeping it together: systems and structures in organisational change, p. 7, NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption, 2017 

^xxiv Guidelines for Managing the Risk of Fraud in Government, p.5, Office of the Auditor General of British Columbia, 2010