Despite the increased initiatives to combat corruption, the issue of corruption in the public sector in Nigeria persists. Past studies have found that one of the flaws is due to the ineffective investigation method. Given the seriousness of the issue, this study explores how forensic accounting investigation conducted by the authorities could assist the government in its initiatives to combat corruption in Nigeria. This study aimed at developing a model for improving the investigation of public sector corruption in Nigeria using forensic accounting techniques. Forensic accounting is a technique for detecting and investigating fraudulent practices in organizations and preparing evidence for expert witnessing at the court of law. In doing so, the Gioia Methodology was used to explore the understanding of the process of how forensic accounting is used to investigate corruption cases. We conducted a total of 24 face-to-face interviews with experts from the two leading anti-corruption agencies in Nigeria, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission of Nigeria (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC). We conducted in-depth interviews with purposively selected participants to gain an insightful data structure. The data structure led to the emergence of a dynamic model depicting the relationship among themes and the aggregate dimensions. The study revealed four aggregate dimensions, commitment of national values, judicial reform, a preventive mechanism and financial commitment. The study recommends future studies to be conducted using quantitative research to test the model developed.
forensic accounting, investigation, public sector corruption, Gioia Methodology, Nigeria
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
Recommended APA Citation
Suleiman, N., & Othman, Z. B. (2021). Forensic Accounting Investigation of Public Sector Corruption in Nigeria: The Gioia Methodology. The Qualitative Report, 26(3), 1021-1032. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.3907