Plutonium was an Internet start-up company founded in 1988 at the beginning of the technology boom. One of the largest problems for Plutonium was developing the technological systems necessary to support the rapidly expanding user base. Furthermore, due to the rapid expansion in recent years, many of its systems had been added hastily, resulting in poor integration and eroding data integrity. As a result, the CEO of Plutonium announced an initiative to integrate all systems and increase the quality of internal data. In compliance with this initiative, Plutonium purchased an expensive and complex billing system called Gateway, which would automate the billing for thousands of Internet accounts via credit cards. During the integration, Gateway, in collaboration with Visa, created a phony credit card number that could be used by developers and programmers to test the functionality and integration of the Gateway system. Moreover, this credit card number was fully functional in”live” environments so testers and developers could ensure functionality without being required to use actual personal or company credit card numbers(the activity on this card was not monitored). The integration went smoothly; however, it created thousands of corrupt accounts that required fixing. Jonathan, the manager of the Operations Department, was responsible for the resolution of all data integrity issues. His team was tasked with fixing all corrupt accounts created by the launch and integration of the Gateway system. As a result, Jonathan was given the phony credit card number, which was kept on a Post-it Note in his drawer.
One of the top performers on the Operations team was a 29-year-old male named Chris. Chris had worked in Operations for over a year and was making $15 per hour, the same salary at which he was hired. He was an introvert working to support a young family and put himself through school. Chris was the most technologically savvy individual on the team, and his overall systems knowledge even exceeded that of his manager, Jonathon. Chris was very brilliant in creating more efficient tools and methods to repair corrupted accounts. Therefore, Chris was tasked with conducting training for new employees and updating team members on new processes and tools that he had created. As a result, Chris quickly became a trusted and valuable team member; thus, Jonathon gave him and other team members the phony credit card number inorder to further increase the productivity of the team.
six months of working at Plutonium, Chris received an official reprimand from the company for using the company system to access Web sites containing pirated software and music. The FBI attended the investigation and determined that Chris had not been a major player in the piracy. Therefore, Chris was quietly warned and placed on a short-term probation. Jonathon was asked to write a warning letter for the action; however, after a brief conversation with Chris, Jonathon determined that Chris’s intentions were good and never officially submitted the letter because Chris was a trusted employee and elevated the overall performance of the team. A few months after the piracy incident, Jonathon noticed some changes in Chris’s behavior such as (a) his computer monitor was repositioned so that his screen was not visible to other co-workers, (b) he had almost all the latest technological innovations, (c) he was going out to lunch more frequently, and (d) he frequently used multiple fake usernames and passwords for testing purposes.
Chris faced several pressures that may have pushed him towards fraud:
a. Financial Pressure: Chris was making $15 per hour while supporting a young family and putting himself through school. This financial strain could have motivated him to seek additional income through fraudulent means.
b. Peer Pressure: The introduction of the phony credit card number by Jonathan may have created an unspoken expectation for Chris to use it, especially if other team members were doing the same. Peer pressure can be a significant motivator for fraud.
Potential Opportunities for Chris to Commit Fraud: Several opportunities for fraud were present in this case:
a. Access to Sensitive Information: Chris had access to the phony credit card number and various systems due to his role. This access provided him with the means to exploit the credit card for personal gain.
b. Limited Oversight: Jonathan did not officially submit a warning letter for Chris’s prior misconduct, indicating a lack of oversight and accountability. This leniency could have emboldened Chris to engage in further misconduct.
c. Use of Fake Usernames and Passwords: Chris’s use of multiple fake usernames and passwords for testing purposes could potentially hide his activities or intentions, making it easier to misuse company resources.
Potential Rationalizations for Chris to Commit Fraud: To justify his fraudulent actions, Chris might have used rationalizations such as:
a. Balancing Injustice: Chris may have felt that the company’s leniency regarding the piracy incident created a sense of injustice. He might have believed that using the phony credit card number was a way to “even the score” or compensate for perceived unfair treatment.
b. Necessity: Chris might have convinced himself that he needed additional funds due to his financial struggles, making the fraudulent use of the credit card a necessary means to support his family and education.
c. Peer Influence: If other team members were also using the phony credit card number, Chris could have rationalized his actions by thinking that “everyone else is doing it,” normalizing the behavior in his mind.
Symptoms Indicating Potential Fraud: Several symptoms in Chris’s behavior suggest the potential existence of fraud:
a. Increased Secrecy: Chris repositioned his computer monitor to hide his screen, indicating a desire to keep his actions concealed.
b. Excessive Spending: His acquisition of the latest technological innovations and increased frequency of going out to lunch might indicate unexplained wealth or income.
c. Use of Fake Usernames and Passwords: This behavior, although ostensibly for testing purposes, could be used to cover up unauthorized activities.
Actions Jonathon Could Have Taken to Eliminate Opportunities for Fraud: To mitigate the opportunities for fraud, Jonathon could have taken the following steps:
a. Strict Enforcement of Policies: Ensure strict enforcement of company policies regarding the use of company systems for personal activities and unauthorized access to sensitive data.
b. Regular Monitoring: Implement regular monitoring of employee activities to detect any unusual behavior or patterns, such as excessive use of fake usernames and passwords.
c. Clear Consequences: Clearly communicate and enforce consequences for policy violations, including unauthorized use of company resources.
d. Regular Employee Training: Provide ongoing training and reminders about ethical conduct, emphasizing the importance of adhering to company policies.
e. Anonymous Reporting System: Establish an anonymous reporting system for employees to report any concerns about unethical behavior or policy violations without fear of retaliation.
In conclusion, this case highlights the importance of understanding the fraud triangle to identify potential pressures, opportunities, and rationalizations that can lead individuals like Chris to commit fraud. Employers, represented here by Jonathon, must take proactive steps to minimize these opportunities and create a culture of ethical behavior within the organization. This not only protects the company’s interests but also promotes a healthier and more productive work environment.
As a renowned provider of the best writing services, we have selected unique features which we offer to our customers as their guarantees that will make your user experience stress-free.
Unlike other companies, our money-back guarantee ensures the safety of our customers' money. For whatever reason, the customer may request a refund; our support team assesses the ground on which the refund is requested and processes it instantly. However, our customers are lucky as they have the least chances to experience this as we are always prepared to serve you with the best.
Plagiarism is the worst academic offense that is highly punishable by all educational institutions. It's for this reason that Peachy Tutors does not condone any plagiarism. We use advanced plagiarism detection software that ensures there are no chances of similarity on your papers.
Sometimes your professor may be a little bit stubborn and needs some changes made on your paper, or you might need some customization done. All at your service, we will work on your revision till you are satisfied with the quality of work. All for Free!
We take our client's confidentiality as our highest priority; thus, we never share our client's information with third parties. Our company uses the standard encryption technology to store data and only uses trusted payment gateways.
Anytime you order your paper with us, be assured of the paper quality. Our tutors are highly skilled in researching and writing quality content that is relevant to the paper instructions and presented professionally. This makes us the best in the industry as our tutors can handle any type of paper despite its complexity.
Recent Comments