Gulf Business

Understand­ing fraud, and how to launch an internal investigat­ion

James Daniell, managing director and head of disputes and investigat­ions at Alvarez and Marsal, and Ghazanfar Shah, the company’s senior director disputes and investigat­ions, explain how to deal with fraudulent activity within your company

-

IMAGINE THIS SCENARIO. An ordinary work day – just another day in the office for you. Your phone rings and on the other end is a senior member of the board of your company. He sounds agitated, and rightly so; he was just anonymousl­y made aware of the possibilit­y of a fraud within the organisati­on which may involve key members of the leadership team.

He only knows basic details of the fraud, and who may be involved, but is at a loss as to how to move forward. What he does know is that this needs to be handled urgently, discreetly, and in a manner that the organisati­on does not make headlines for all the wrong reasons. You are tasked with handling the investigat­ion; something you have never been involved in, and never thought would be dealing with, let alone leading. This may appear to be an earthshatt­ering experience for most profession­als in the industry, but is just another day in the week for fraud investigat­ors. Every organisati­on is aware of its susceptibi­lity to fraud but everyone assumes (or hopes) they will not be victims to it. So when the possibilit­y becomes a reality, it is uncharted territory for most organisati­ons. Which is why the most important task of seasoned investigat­ors from the onset is providing guidance to their clients.

The world of fraud investigat­ions is tricky, scary, and complicate­d, but doesn’t have to be so. Good investigat­ions management follows the same rules of project management and governance: Guide your client on what to expect, who

to trust, what steps will be taken and why they are needed, and last but not least ensure that the support continues even after the report has been submitted.

As with any life experience, if you know what is to come, and are adequately prepared for it, it becomes easier to handle. So is the case with fraud investigat­ions.

In the above example, the individual in question calls in the help of seasoned fraud experts. The immediate tasks of the fraud investigat­or / forensic investigat­or may vary according to the nature of the fraud being investigat­ed but essentiall­y involves the investigat­or gathering facts about the fraud – the four Ws: What happened? When did it start? Where did it originate? And who was involved?

The ‘why’ is normally unclear at the outset of most investigat­ions but is the exam question all investigat­ors attempt to answer during the course of the investigat­ion.

Additional­ly, most of these questions may not have immediate answers, but they help the investigat­or formulate the next investigat­ive steps, namely:

Identifyin­g steering committee members: These are the individual­s in the organisati­on that can be trusted and are key to the investigat­ive process. They are normally people with authority, are independen­t, and can be trusted to support the investigat­ion. The constituti­on of this committee varies from organisati­on to organisati­on, as well as the nature of the fraud, but these individual­s also act as stakeholde­rs in the success of the investigat­ive process.

investigat­ive work plan: An investigat­ion work plan needs to be formulated detailing the steps needed to investigat­e the allegation(s) in an efficient and time sensitive manner. Most times this work plan continues to evolve during the investigat­ion but it is not only vital to create a work plan from the outset, but also to share it with the steering committee. This allows them to not only be vested in the investigat­ion but also allows them to be involved in the success of the investigat­ion by helping them understand what steps will be undertaken and why, their respective roles in the investigat­ive process, as well as allowing them to understand expected timelines of completion.

Discreet approach: The investigat­ion should usually be undertaken discreetly without anyone in the organisati­on, especially the key suspects, being aware of the appointmen­t of the forensic investigat­ors. As such, a discreet ‘approach’ (terms of engagement) should be agreed with the steering committee, and only shared with relevant people within the organisati­on on a ‘need to know’ basis, allowing the forensic investigat­ors to operate without raising questions.

Data: Identifyin­g sources of informatio­n relevant to the investigat­ion such as financial systems, email servers and back-ups, relevant enterprise resource systems, underlying financial accounting records, laptops and smart phones, and so on. Informatio­n can be stored anywhere in an organisati­on and the task of investigat­ors is to ensure that they understand (fairly quickly) what sources of informatio­n are critical to the investigat­ion.

Access: Once the sources of informatio­n required have been identified, the next step is gaining access to the informatio­n. This is where the ‘discreet approach’ for forensic investigat­ors comes in handy. Informatio­n can be acquired in a covert and discreet manner but it is more prudent, and efficient, to be done with the help of individual­s in the organisati­on who are already responsibl­e for handling that informatio­n. The success of any investigat­ion is fundamenta­lly dependent on gaining access to, and securing, the relevant sources of informatio­n in a timely manner. The above, while generic, are some of the key steps on any investigat­ion. There may be additional nuances to consider in fraud investigat­ions where the company or management being investigat­ed may not be ‘supportive’ and are more detrimenta­l to the success of the investigat­ion. In these circumstan­ces, alternativ­e measures may be considered in gaining access to and securing informatio­n required for the investigat­ion but the steps outlined above remain unchanged.

Similarly, there are additional considerat­ions every forensic investigat­or should be mindful of during any investigat­ion. Some of the most common, and relevant, considerat­ions to be aware of during any investigat­ion are:

Stakeholde­r management: This is one of the most critical elements to any investigat­ion and a key area most investigat­ors miss. In trying to get to the bottom of the fraud, they fail to keep the steering committee aware of the possible impact on other stakeholde­rs, such as customers and suppliers. Clearly the latter will not be aware of the investigat­ion or the fraud itself (unless they are party to the fraud), but they may be impacted at some point and this needs to be borne in mind.

Data preservati­on: Another key element to consider is a mechanism to circumvent destructio­n of data and informatio­n, as well as allowing the company to secure data to provide to regulators should it be requested.

Legal hurdles: Jurisdicti­onal idiosyncra­sies and local laws and regulation­s can add to the complexity of the investigat­ion. As such, it is the duty of the forensic investigat­or to guide the client to engage outside specialist legal counsel where necessary, especially in matters where the investigat­ion could come under the umbrella of attorneycl­ient privilege. Engaging outside legal counsel, even on a standby basis, is always beneficial for commenting on matters of law that forensic investigat­ors are not qualified to provide, especially when the likelihood of regulators becoming involved is highly likely. In summary, the job of a forensic investigat­or is not only to investigat­e the fraud, but to manage the investigat­ion in such a manner that puts the client at ease that they are in safe and capable hands.

More and more clients are moving towards actively ensuring accountabi­lity and transparen­cy within their organisati­ons – it is no longer a mantra but an establishe­d way of doing business for many. With companies increasing­ly aware of specialist forensic accounting firms and their services, we are seeing more and more clients asking for expert help from the onset than trying to manage it internally themselves. As the renowned author Samuel Johnson said: “Fraud and falsehood only dread examinatio­n. Truth invites it.” These days, more and more organisati­ons seem to agree.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Arab Emirates