Skip to content

FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Case Study: Financial Crime and Fraud

A trading desk head has aggressive bonus targets, a history of closing out loss-making positions late in the quarter, and a middle office that relies on spreadsheets he controls to produce P&L. Staff say 'everyone shades marks a bit to protect the franchise.' Which mapping of these observations to the fraud triangle is correct?

Bonus targets are pressure, the desk head's control of unverified P&L spreadsheets is opportunity, and the belief that everyone shades marks is rationalization. Each observation matches one corner of the fraud triangle, and the other options misassign at least two elements.

  1. ABonus targets: opportunity; spreadsheet control: pressure; 'everyone shades marks': rationalization
  2. BBonus targets: pressure; spreadsheet control: opportunity; 'everyone shades marks': rationalizationCorrect
  3. CBonus targets: rationalization; spreadsheet control: pressure; 'everyone shades marks': opportunity
  4. DBonus targets: pressure; spreadsheet control: rationalization; 'everyone shades marks': opportunity

Explanation

Incentive targets create pressure to misreport. Control over the P&L spreadsheets with weak independent verification gives opportunity. The normalization of mark shading is a collective justification, so rationalization. The other mappings swap these roles.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Case Study: Financial Crime and Fraud shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Case Study: Financial Crime and Fraud questions