Abstract
This article examines whether internal governance in the form of managerial dissent between the CEO and subordinate executives reduces fraud likelihood. We model fraud as a rational decision in a cost–benefit framework and a collective activity by all executives. The model predicts a negative relation between dissent and fraud occurrence. We use three measures for higher dissent: a larger fraction of subordinates having joined the firm prior to the CEO, a lower CEO pay slice, and a smaller difference in pay performance sensitivity between the two; and find supporting evidence. We address endogeneity concerns by including firm-fixed effects, constructing a propensity score–matched sample, and conducting instrument variable analysis. We also find that fraud duration is negatively related to dissent.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
