Posted by Steve Wilcox on Wed, Aug 05, 2009 @ 10:04 AM
Question: What is the #1 reason why people cheat?
Answer: Money.
So it looks like David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez are on "The List" of players who used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDS) in 2003. Big, BIG news here in Red Sox Nation as it kinda taints the 2004 and 2007 World Series Championships.
Or does it?
Every power hitter from 1988 (and probably earlier) likely used steroids. Ortiz' career highs in HRs and RBIs were in 2003 after very average stats in his earlier years with Minnesota. Is it really that surprising that Big Papi started "juicing" before he became "good?"
The Ortiz story is a bummer but I am not naïve. Afterall, what sport is clean? I believe that most professional athletes dope. It's the only way to survive as a pro. If you do not dope, you will probably be out of a job sooner rather than later. The sad truth is that there is an undeniable economic attraction to steroids in professional sports (see Economics of Steroids). The more homeruns you hit, the more you get paid! Duh.
I am not shocked that cheating happens in pro sports where livelihoods and millions and millions of $$$ are on the line. Here is what I am shocked about -- cheating happens in youth sports too. I thought youth sports were different ... until this past week.
I am not necessarily talking about PEDs being used by middle school teens (which would be truly shocking) but cheating by coaches in particular. Let me explain.
At camps and youth leagues, most of the scoring and time-keeping is done by biased parties such as parents and/or coaches. It's an honor system. For example, at a basketball camp I recently attended, games were managed by one coach keeping track of the clock while the opposing coach kept track of the score. Since it is a summer camp, you just assume the other coach is trustworthy.
So here's the quick story - in a close game where I had the clock and the other coach had the score, the other coach blatantly cheated by not counting our baskets. We are talking not just 1 or 2 points but 10 POINTS! Yup, we scored 10 points that he didn't record. All the kids knew it. This coach wanted to win a summer camp basketball game so badly that he cheated. I was stunned. What was this coach thinking??? Did he think nobody would notice? The really sad part (for him) is that, from now on, whenever I (or the kids on my team) see him, the first thought that will go through my mind is "that guy is a cheater."
This story is a classic case of a conflict of interests where responsibilities should be segregated. The person keeping the score shouldn't be one of the coaches! But the situation was unavoidable because everyone is busy and there are just not enough extra non-biased folks to keep the score and time.
This lack of resources leading to conflicts of interest is a common situation in AP.
In AP, there are many conflicting duties which should always be segregated:
-
the person entering the invoice should not approve the invoice
-
the person who sets up a vendor should not enter the invoice into the ERP system
-
the person who approves the invoice should not audit that same invoice
-
etc.
There are many AP examples where duties should be segregated. The problem is that most finance departments constantly have pressure to do more with less. But to follow segregation of duties to the letter, you need enough staff which isn't always a luxury - especially in these economic conditions.
As I wrote in a previous blog post, here is where AP automation can help:
"With workflow software, you should have complete visibility into the AP process as the invoice transitions from one step to the next ... the AP system should track all changes maintaining a comprehensive audit trail of what was performed and by whom for all prior steps.
With workflow, limited headcount can still allow for segregated duties since segregation can be enforced at the transaction level instead of the job role level. Employees can still be cross trained and allowed to perform multiple functions as long as they don't perform conflicting duties on the same transaction. For example, an AP Specialist could both enter invoices and also setup suppliers as long as there is no conflict on each and every transaction.
This transaction-level segregation can be enforced by the workflow software which allows you to move away from restrictive job role controls ... rather than limiting what functions employees can carry out as part of their jobs, this approach allows enterprises to boost productivity while mitigating the business risks."
With fraud rising (see Managing Risk blog entry), transaction-level segregation is a great way to catch cheaters. In fact, it is probably THE best way to prevent cheating in AP that could cost the company significant money.
-Rakesh Shukla
@rakesh170
Related White Papers
Related Blog Posts