This study addresses the persistent challenge of fraud risk within external audit
engagements by examining how auditors detect, interpret, and escalate fraud risk
signals under conditions of ambiguity, procedural opacity, and institutional constraint.
Despite the codification of fraud-related responsibilities in auditing standards, auditors
continue to encounter governance and procedural barriers that inhibit signal
responsiveness. These constraints contribute to missed fraud risk signals, hesitancy
to escalate fraud risk signals, and the erosion of audit credibility. The aim of this
research is to develop a contextually grounded substantive theory that explains the
interpretive, procedural, and organisational architecture underpinning Fraud Risk
Signal Detection (FRSD).
This study adopts Glaser’s Traditional Grounded Theory (TGT) within a postpositivist
paradigm, critical realist ontology, and modified objectivist epistemology. Thirty semistructured
interviews with external auditors across hierarchical levels and firm sizes
were conducted, supplemented by eight follow-up engagements. Theoretical
sampling, constant comparison, and iterative memo-writing were applied to generate
conceptual categories, with literature engagement delayed until saturation to protect
theoretical emergence. NVivo was used solely for data retrieval.
The resulting FRSD theory explains how auditors manage two core concerns: (1)
missed fraud risk signals, and (2) hesitancy to escalate signals that are weak,
ambiguous, or procedurally suppressed. This theory is anchored in the core category
Audit Firm Governance and Culture, which mediates the legitimacy and traceability of
interpretive judgment. It introduces Adaptive Skeptical Vigilance as an enabling
mechanism, a governance-conditioned interpretive mindset characterised by overridesensitive
reasoning, ethical inquiry, and interrogative challenge. Together, these
components structure a six-phase Basic Social Process (BSP) of Institutionalising
Vigilance: (1) pre-engagement risk profiling, (2) client risk contextualisation, (3) fraud
lens construction and parameterisation, (4) governance-enabled signal interrogation,
(5) escalation decision-making, and (6) institutional learning. Risk-parameterised
analytics and forensic specialist collaboration operate as signal amplifiers under
diagnostic uncertainty.
iv
Informed by this saturated theory, this study presents seven theoretically derived
recommendations for audit firms, regulators, and standard-setting bodies. These
include reinforcing governance structures that authorise escalation; embedding
skeptical vigilance within audit routines; integrating forensic and data specialists into
escalation structures; institutionalising post-engagement learning; and revising
standards such as ISA 240 to reflect governance-mediated interpretive infrastructures.
These recommendations advance a governance-anchored model of fraud risk
vigilance, clarifying that effective FRSD is not a function of individual skepticism alone,
but of structurally enabled organisational capacity.
Hierdie studie ondersoek die volgehoue uitdaging van bedrogrisiko binne eksterne
ouditopdragte deur te analiseer hoe ouditeure tekens van bedrogrisiko identifiseer,
interpreteer en eskaleer onder toestande van dubbelsinnigheid, prosedurele
ondeursigtigheid en institusionele beperkinge. Ten spyte van die kodifisering van
bedrogverwante verantwoordelikhede in ouditstandaarde, kom ouditeure steeds te
staan voor bestuurs- en prosedurele struikelblokke wat hul sensitiwiteit vir risikotekens
verhoed. Hierdie beperkings lei daartoe dat risikotekens misgekyk word en dat
ouditeure huiwerig is om die tekens te eskaleer; wat die geloofwaardigheid van oudits
erodeer. Die doel van die navorsing is om’n substantiewe, kontekstueel-gegronde
teorie te ontwikkel wat die interpretatiewe, prosedurele en organisatoriese raamwerk
onderlê wat bedrogrisikoteken-opsporing (FRSD) moontlik maak, verduidelik.
Die studie maak gebruik van Glaser se Tradisionele Grondteorie (TGT) binne ’n
postpositivistiese paradigma, met ’n krities-realistiese ontologie en ’n gewysigde
objektivistiese epistemologie. Dertig semi-gestruktureerde onderhoude met eksterne
ouditeure van verskillende hiërargiese vlakke en firmasgroottes is gevoer, aangevul
deur agt opvolgonderhoude. Teoretiese steekproefneming, konstante vergelyking en
iteratiewe opstelling van memo’s is toegepas om konseptuele kategorieë te genereer,
terwyl literatuurbenutting doelbewus uitgestel is totdat versadiging bereik is, ten einde
teoretiese verskyning te beskerm. NVivo is uitsluitlik vir dataherwinning gebruik.
Die gevolglike FRSD-teorie verduidelik hoe ouditeure twee kernprobleme hanteer:
eerstens, die miskenning van bedrogrisiko-tekens, en tweedens, die huiwering om
tekens wat vaag, dubbelsinnig of prosedureel onderdruk is, te eskaleer. Hierdie teorie
is gesentreer rondom die kernkategorie Ouditfirmabestuur en -kultuur, wat die
legitimiteit en naspeurbaarheid van interpretatiewe beoordeling bemiddel. Daarin word
Aanpasbare Skeptiese Waaksaamheid voorgestel as ’n bemagtigende meganisme,
naamlik ’n bestuursafhanklike interpretatiewe ingesteldheid wat gekenmerk word deur
sensitiwiteitoorheersende redenering, etiese ondersoek en kritiese bevraagtekening.
Tesame struktureer hierdie elemente ’n ses-fase Basiese Sosiale Proses (BSP) van
Institusionalisering van Waaksaamheid: (1) risikoprofielsamestelling voor aanvang
van die opdrag, (2) kontekstualisering van kliëntrisiko, (3) konstruksie en
parameterisering van ’n “bedrog-lens”, (4) bestuursbemagtigde tekenondersoek, (5)
vi
besluitneming rakende eskalasie, en (6) institusionele leer. Risikogeparameteriseerde
analitiese prosedures en samewerking met forensiese spesialiste
funksioneer as tekenversterkers onder toestande van diagnostiese onsekerheid.
Gebaseer op hierdie versadigde teorie, formuleer die studie sewe teoretiesgefundeerde
aanbevelings vir ouditfirmas, reguleerders en standaardstellende
liggame. Dit sluit onder meer in: die versterking van bestuurstrukture wat eskalasie
legitimeer; die inbedding van skeptiese waaksaamheid in ouditroetines; die integrasie
van forensiese en dataspesialiste in eskalasieprosesse; die institusionalisering van
leer ná opdragte; asook die hersiening van standaarde soos ISA 240 om
bestuursbemiddelde interpretatiewe infrastruktuur te weerspieël. Hierdie aanbevelings
bevorder ’n bestuursgeankerde model van bedrogrisiko-waaksaamheid en
beklemtoon dat doeltreffende FRSD nie bloot ’n funksie van individuele skeptisisme is
nie, maar van struktureel-verankerde organisatoriese kapasiteit afhanklik is .
Lolu cwaningo lwenzelwe ukubheka inselelo ehlala ivela uma kwenziwa
ucwaningomabhuku angaphandle ngokuthi kuhlolwe ukuba abacwaningi bamabhuku
bazithola kanjani, bazihumushe, futhi bazidlulise kanjani izinkomba zobungozi
bezokukhwabanisa ngaphansi kwezimo zokungaqondakali, ukungabonakali kahle
kwezinqubo, kanjalo nezingqinamba zesikhungo. Naphezu kokufakwa kwamakhodi
ngokwezibopho eziphathelene nokukhwabanisa emazingeni okucwaningwa
kwamabhuku, abacwaningi bamabhuku basaqhubeka nokuhlangabezana
nezingqinamba kwezokuphatha kanye nezinqubo ezivimbela ukusebenza
kwezimpawu zokumelana nesimo. Lezi zingqinamba zinomthelela ekutheni
zingabonakali izimpawu zobungozi kwezokukhwabanisa, ungabazane lobuningi
bezimpawu zobungozi kwezokukhwabanisa, kanjalo nokungathembakali
kwezocwaningomabhuku. Inhloso yalolu cwaningo ukuqhamuka nendlela
yokusebenza eqondile enesisekelo futhi ezochaza, ikhombise inqubo, iphinde iveze
ukuma kwesakhiwo okusekela Isiqaguli Sezinkomba Zobungozi Kwezokukhwabanisa
(FRSD).
Lolu cwaningo lusebenzise iGlaser's Traditional Grounded Theory (TGT) ngaphansi
kohlelomqondo lokuqondisisa, ubunjalo besimo, kanye nendlela yokwazi izimo
eziguquliwe. Lapha kuye kwenziwa izinhlolovo ezivulelekile ezingamashumi
amathathu nabacwaningi mabhuku bangaphandle kuwo wonke amazinga ezikhundla
kanye nangobungako bamafemu, kwengezwa nangezingxoxo zokulandelela
eziyisishiyagalombili. Kuphinde kwasetshenziswa namasampuli endlela yokwenza,
ukuqhathanisa, kanye nokuphindelela kokubhalwa kwememo ukuze kutholakale
imiqondo eyahlukahlukene, kwabandakanywa nezincwadi ezibambezeleka kuze kube
kuqala ukusebenza kwendlela yokuvikela. INVivo isetshenziselwe ukubuyisa
imininingo kuphela.
Umphumela wendlela yokusebenza kweFRSD uchaza indlela abacwaningi mabhuku
abaphatha ngayo izimo ezimbili ezikhathazayo: (1) ukuhluleka ukubona izimpawu
zengozi bezokukhwabanisa, kanye (2) nongabazane lobuningi bezimpawu zobungozi
kwezokukhwabanisa, ukungacaci, noma ukucindezeleka ngokwenqubo
yokusebenza. Le ndlela yokusebenza igxile esigabeni esiwumongo waBacwaningi
Bamabhuku Okwengamela Amafemu Nosiko, esilawula ukuba semthethweni
viii
nokulandeleka okucacisa ngokwahlulela. Le ndlela yethula i-Adaptive Sceptical
Vigilance njengendlela enika amandla, indlela yokucabanga icacise
ngokunombandela wokuphatha nokucabanga ngobucayi, uphenyo lwezimiso
zokuziphatha, kanye nenselelo uma kubuzwa okuthile. Uma sekuhlangene, le minxa
yakha izinhlaka eziyisithupha zeBasic Social Process (BSP) of Institutionalizing
Vigilance: (1) ukubhekwa kwesimo ngaphambi kokusisebenza, (2) ukubhekelelwa
kwengcuphe yekhasimende, (3) ukwakhiwa kweziqaphi kwezokukhwabanisa
nokubekwa kwemikhawulo, (4) ukuphenywa kwezinkomba ngokwamandla okubusa,
(5) ukukhuphula izinga ekuthatheni izinqumo, kanye (6) nokufunda ngesikhungo.
Ukuhlaziya ngokwemikhawulo ebekiwe kanye nokusebenzisana kochwepheshe
bezobunhloli kusebenza njengendlela yokwandisa izinkomba ngaphansi
kongabazane lwalokho okuhlolwayo.
Ngokususela kule ndlela ephelele yokusebenza, lolu cwaningo lwethula izincomo
eziyisikhombisa ezisuselwe ezimfundisweni zamafemu acwaninga amabhuku,
abalawuli, kanye nezinhlangano ezinquma ngendlela yokusebenza. Lokhu
kubandakanya: ukuqinisa izinhlaka zokubusa ezigunyaza ngokunyuswa kwezinga;
ukuqashelwa kongabazane ngaphakathi kwezinqubo zokucwaninga; ukuhlanganisa
ochwepheshe bezobunhloli kanye nongoti bezemininingo ekubhekeleni ukwanda
kwezakhiwo; ukufaka imfundo yaphambilini ibe ngaphansi kwesikhungo; kanye
nokubuyekeza izilinganiso ezifana ne-ISA 240 ukuze zibonise ingqalasizinda ecacisa
ngokuqondiswa kwendlela yokubusa. Lezi zincomo ziqhubekisela phambili indlela
yokubusa enesisekelo ekuqapheni izingozi kwezokukhwabanisa, zicacisa ukuthi
impumelelo yeFRSD ayiwona umsebenzi ongenziwa umuntu oyedwa, kodwa
kudingeka abasebenzi benhlangano jikelele.
