Author
Abstract
Purpose - This paper aims to explore the current trends in corruption and investigate the characteristics of corporate gift policies and their role in preventing bribery. Design/methodology/approach - This is a descriptive study based on primary data from a recent sample of Canadian companies’ codes of conduct and secondary data from recent corruption surveys published by non-governmental organisations. Findings - This study shows that 25% of all private and public corruption cases generate financial damages of more than US$1m per case and that 50% of all investigated fraud cases are corruption cases (ACFE, 2022). Furthermore, the Western Europe and EU region is perceived as least corrupt, whereas Sub-Saharan Africa is perceived as the most corrupt region (Transparency International, 2022). However, bribery is fairly common in nine EU countries where 10% or more of public service users bribed public officials to influence their decisions (Transparency International, 2021). Results from primary data show that 9.3% of firms put a total ban on gifts given to governmental officials, whereas 35.2% require a superior’s approval and only 5.5% state a dollar limit for the gift. Results also show that not a single firm prohibits the giving of gifts to non-governmental stakeholders or the receiving of gifts from any type of stakeholder. This paper argues that gifts can bias the recipient’s judgement and improperly influence future business decisions based on the gift’s subjective value, nature and context. Research limitations/implications - This paper extends previous research by examining the characteristics of corporate gift policies. It also helps organisations improve their gift policies in an effort to reduce corruption. Originality/value - It is the first paper to investigate the characteristics of corporate gift policies and their role in preventing corruption.
Suggested Citation
Dominic Peltier-Rivest, 2023.
"Gift or bribe? The characteristics and the role of gift policies in the prevention of corruption,"
Journal of Financial Crime, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(5), pages 1094-1105, November.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jfcpps:jfc-09-2023-0222
DOI: 10.1108/JFC-09-2023-0222
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jfcpps:jfc-09-2023-0222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.