Fraud Hexagon Dalam Pengelolaan Keuangan Sektor Publik: Sebuah Systematic Literature Review
Article Sidebar
Abstract Views: 0
File Views: 0
Main Article Content
Abstract
Pengelolaan keuangan sektor publik rentan terhadap kecurangan akibat kompleksitas birokrasi, patronase politik, dan lemahnya pengawasan. Penelitian ini bertujuan mengkaji penerapan Fraud Hexagon dalam pengelolaan keuangan sektor publik melalui pendekatan Systematic Literature Review (SLR). Dengan protokol PRISMA (Preffered Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses), penelitian ini menganalisis 25 artikel jurnal peer reviewed terindeks Scopus, Web of Science, dan Sinta yang diterbitkan pada 2019-2024. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa dari enam elemen Fraud Hexagon, kolusi (80% studi) dan peluang (72%) merupakan faktor paling konsisten signifikan dalam konteks pemerintahan, mencakup kementerian/lembaga, BUMN/BUMD, pemerintah daerah, dan pemerintah desa. Temuan ini berbeda dari sektor swasta yang lebih banyak menempatkan tekanan finansial sebagai faktor dominan. Pengendalian internal, independensi komite audit, pengawasan eksternal oleh BPK/BPKP, dan budaya kelembagaan anti korupsi terindifikasi sebagai faktor penting dalam memoderasi risiko kecurangan. Studi ini mengidentifikasi enam kesenjangan penelitian, yaitu keterbatasan studi longitudinal, minimnya kajian pemerintah kabupaten/kota dan dana desa, kurangnya studi lintas negara, keterbatasan proksi kolusi dan ego, belum optimalnya kajian digitalisasi, serta minimnya analisis pascapandemi. Penelitian ini berkontribusi secara teoritis dan praktis dalam memperluas penerapan Fraud Hexagon Theory serta mendukung pengembangan kajian antifraud sektor publik di Indonesia.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
Achmad, T., Ghozali, I., & Pamungkas, I. D. (2022). Hexagon fraud: Detection of fraudulent financial reporting in state-owned enterprises Indonesia. Economies, 10(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10010013
Achmad, T., Ghozali, I., Helmina, M. R. A., Hapsari, D. I., & Pamungkas, I. D. (2023). Detecting fraudulent financial reporting using the fraud hexagon model: Evidence from the banking sector in Indonesia. Economies, 11(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11010005
Alfarago, D., Syukur, M., & Mabrur, A. (2023). The likelihood of fraud from the fraud hexagon perspective: Evidence from Indonesia. ABAC Journal, 43(1), 34–51. https://doi.org/10.14456/abacj.2023.3
Atmadja, A. T., Dharmawan, N. A. S., & Saputra, K. A. K. (2024). Faktor-faktor penentu yang mempengaruhi kecurangan akuntansi dalam pengelolaan keuangan pemerintah daerah. Australasian Accounting, Business & Finance Journal, 18(1), 148–166. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v18i1.09
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2024). Occupational fraud 2024: A report to the nations. ACFE. https://legacy.acfe.com/report-to-the-nations/2024/
Aviantara, R. (2021). The association between fraud hexagon and government's fraudulent financial report. Asia Pacific Fraud Journal, 6(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.21532/apfjournal.v6i1.192
Crowe Horwath. (2011). Why the fraud triangle is no longer enough. Crowe LLP.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9707180258
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Fitriyani, E., Gamayuni, R. R., & Suhendro, S. (2024). Fraud hexagon and corruption: A systematic literature review. Proceedings of ICEBE 2024. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.4-9-2024.2353790
Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2024). Laporan tren penindakan kasus korupsi tahun 2023. ICW. https://www.antikorupsi.org
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. (2024). Kinerja KPK 2020–2024: Tangani 2.730 perkara korupsi. KPK. https://www.kpk.go.id
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339, b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
Nugroho, D. S., & Diyanty, V. (2022). Hexagon fraud in fraudulent financial statements: The moderating role of audit committee. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia, 19(1), 46–67. https://doi.org/10.21002/jaki.2022.03
Pranyanita, A. A. I., Suputra, I. D. G. D., Badera, I. D. N., & Sari, M. M. R. (2021). Determinants of financial statement fraud using the fraud hexagon model. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 12(23), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.7176/RJFA/12-23-03
Sari, M. P., Mahardika, E., Suryandari, D., & Raharja, S. (2022). The audit committee as moderating the effect of hexagon's fraud on fraudulent financial statements in mining companies listed on the Indonesia stock exchange. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), 2150118. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2150118
Sari, S. P., & Khoiriah, N. (2021). Hexagon fraud detection of regional government financial statement as a fraud prevention on the pandemic crisis era. Wacana: Jurnal Sosial dan Humaniora, 24(2), 90–97. https://wacana.ub.ac.id/index.php/wacana/article/view/897
Siahaan, M., Suharman, H., Fitrijanti, T., & Umar, H. (2024). When internal organizational factors improve detecting corruption in state-owned companies. Journal of Financial Crime, 31(2), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-11-2022-0292
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Sofyani, H., Yaya, R., & Widiastuti, H. (2022). The story of rising corruption post-village government reform—A view of three theories: Fraud, managerial hegemony, and culture. Journal of Accounting and Investment, 24(1), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.18196/jai.v24i1.16462
Sukmadilaga, C., Winarningsih, S., Handayani, T., Herianti, E., & Ghani, E. K. (2022). Fraudulent financial reporting in ministerial and governmental institutions in Indonesia: An analysis using hexagon theory. Economies, 10(4), 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10040086
Suryandari, N. N. A., Yadnyana, I. K., Ariyanto, D., & Erawati, N. M. A. (2023). Determinant of fraudulent behavior in the Indonesian rural bank sector using the fraud hexagon perspective. Banks and Bank Systems, 18(4), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.21511/bbs.18(4).2023.16
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Triyanto, D. N., Fajri, M. A. N., & Wahyuni, D. (2023). How is financial reporting fraud with the fraud hexagon approach before and during Covid-19 pandemic? Journal of Contemporary Accounting, 5(2), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.20885/jca.vol5.iss2.art4
Vousinas, G. L. (2019). Advancing theory of fraud: The S.C.O.R.E. model. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(1), 372–381. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-12-2017-0128
Wolfe, D. T., & Hermanson, D. R. (2004). The fraud diamond: Considering the four elements of fraud. The CPA Journal, 74(12), 38–42.