Collectivist Culture and Fraud Activities on Aceh’s Millennial

Workers

Irin Riamanda, Risana Rachmatan, Khatijatusshalihah

Lectures of Psychology Department at Universitas Syiah Kuala, Indonesia

Keywords: Fraud, Collectivist Culture, Millennial Workers, Industrial Revolution 4.0

Abstract: This research aimed to observe the relationship between collectivist cultures toward fraud activities.

Collectivism is defined as a community with strong bond between individuals with families, tribes, or their

in-groups with an expectation that their groups will maintain themselves as the retribution of absolute

royalty (Hofstede, 2011). Variables of fraud activities are seen from two aspects, namely fraud behaviors

(pressure and rationalization) and fraud opportunities (Tuanakotta, 2007). Albrecht (2012) explained that

fraud activities occur mostly because the actors notice and have the opportunity due to poor control system

and monitoring. This condition became the hypothesis in this research namely collectivist culture affects the

occurrence of fraud behaviors in which the opportunities to conduct frauds is the mediator. This research

was conducted on Aceh’s millennial workers in which the data analysis was done through Moderate

Regression Analysis (MRA). The research results showed that there was a significant impact between

collectivist culture and fraud opportunities that collectively increase fraud behaviors on Aceh’s Millennial

workers. According to the results, this research suggests that an open communication and details from

supervisors and subordinates as well as internal monitoring based on local wisdoms to prevent the

emergence of fraud activities in work.

1 INTRODUCTION

Industrial revolution 4.0 is highly contributing in

transforming the human civilization. The utilization

of rapid and new technologies such as artificial

intelligence (AI), e-commerce, big data, and fintech

is helpful for organizations to enhance their

performances in more effective and efficient

manners. Richert (2018) conducted an experimental

study of teamwork participated by robot and

humans. The first group included humanoid robots

which were considered to interact more easily with

human workers, the second group was industrial

robots. According to the research result, it can be

seen that the more productive group was the second

group or the industrial robots because workers were

trusting and willing to cooperate with the robots.

Based on the research mentioned above, it can be

known that regardless of the robot type, the main

role in running industry 4.0 is human (worker).

Although industry 4.0 presents very sophisticated

technologies, however, they won’t assure that

organizations will have good performance.

This argument is consistent with the study of

Shamim, Cang, Yu, Li (2017) which suggested that

organizations should be able to utilize the

technology in industry 4.0 for innovation through

knowledge management toward their employees.

This aspect is crucial to emerge innovative attitude

and new skills on employees. The result of this study

indicated that there was no trust conceived by

subordinates toward the supervisor due to the

sophistication of industry 4.0, the leader often failed

to provide comprehensive information or covered up

some data, and these conditions occurred due to the

sophisticated technologies in the era of industry 4.0.

The distrust of subordinates regarding the

information covered up by supervisors indicates the

presence of fraud activities conducted by supervisors

toward their subordinates. Supervisors can easily

cover any data considered as unprofitable through

the sophistication of technologies offered by

industry 4.0. According to Albrecht et al. (2012),

fraud is every activity designed by individual

intelligence to gain profits through false

representation, surprising tricks, which shifty,

unjust, and make others get deceived. Association

Riamanda, I., Rachmatan, R. and Khatijatusshalihah, .

Collectivist Culture and Fraud Activities on Aceh’s Millennial Workers.

DOI: 10.5220/0009437700660074

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Psychology (ICPsy 2019), pages 66-74

ISBN: 978-989-758-448-0

Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) describes fraud

as any crimes that gain profit from others with

deception as the main operandi by presenting

fallacious data or hiding the truth.

According to those definitions above, it can be

known that the behavior of supervisors who often

covered up information from their subordinates (not

straightforwardly provide every information) can be

determined as conducting fraud activities. Based on

these two studies, it can be discovered that the

sophistication of technologies offered by industry

4.0 has brought the opportunity for the occurrence of

fraud activities. Moreover, if the fraud has been

detrimental for other parties massively due to

systematic crimes.

The issue of the possibility of fraud activities

which will occur in the era of industry 4.0 is crucial

to be studied in Indonesia, considering that

Indonesia has very typical collectivist cultures with

the community that typically loves to live by

assisting each other and has a high social life.

Collectivism is defined as a community with strong

bond between individuals with families, tribes, or

their in-groups with an expectation that their groups

will maintain themselves as the retribution of

absolute royalty (Hofstede, 2011). Moreover,

Triandis (2018) defined collectivism as the strong

bond between individuals seeing themselves one or

more communities and motivated by collective

norms and duties, emphasizing the connectedness

with other members of the community. Both these

definitions are highly correlated with values

conceived by the community in Indonesia.

Sakban and Resmini (2018) stated that Indonesia

has yet to be completely prepared to face the

sophistication of industry 4.0, therefore, it triggers

the fraud cases, the spreading of hoax, thus, local

wisdoms are required to filter the unnecessary

information. Based on the studies presented above,

the typical nature of the community united in group

can be known and emphasizing the connectedness

between people will make the obtained information

to be rapidly heard by the people who listen due to

the presence of collective values conceived by the

community. On the other side, these studies describe

that the values of local wisdom owned by

Indonesian are in principle able to become the

fortress to avoid adverse impact of the poor

dissemination of industry 4.0.

On the other side, the indication for the

possibility of fraud activities which might occur on

the community with collectivist culture is crucial to

be studied for the millennial generation, considering

that this generation is highly proficient in applying

the technological sophistications, and categorized in

the productive working-age. Benesik and Machova

(2016) illustrated the characteristics of generation Y

(millennial generation) as selfish and requiring

freedom, maintaining relation through virtual

network, pleased with the competition to become

leader, have to realize their desires immediately,

working with technologies, flexible, creative,

prioritizing freedom in collecting information, and

disliking traditions that incompatible with their

needs.

Based on the explanations above, it can be

known that the millennial generation or generation Y

which born between 1982 and 2000 (Howe &

Strauss, 2000) have massive desires to work to

accomplish their dreams. In addition, this generation

is accustomed to the utilization of technological

sophistication, and highly prioritizing freedom in

searching for information through technologies. The

millennials are also known with their desire to

achieve success (become leaders) quickly. By seeing

this illustration, the researcher was interested to

make the millennial generation as the object of this

research considering that this generation which will

lead every business element of any organization in

the future, therefore, it becomes crucial to observe

the values of collectivist culture exists within them

and the possibility of them to conduct fraud

activities in the future in the industrial era which has

been more sophisticated. In addition, Aceh is one of

the provinces in Indonesia that has special autonomy

in the sectors of religion, education, and custom;

explaining massive influence of collectivist culture

in this province. Based on the case above, thus, the

researcher was interested to see the relationship

between collectivist culture and fraud activities on

the millennial generation in Aceh.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Fraud

The discussion about fraud can be explained through

Fraud Triangle (Tuanakotta, 2007) which describes

the reasons people are conducting fraud. According

to his research, Fraud Triangle consists of

opportunity, pressure, and rationalization.

Opportunities are situations that open the chance for

managers or staffs that enable the possibility of

fraudulence caused by undetected activities due to

the improper managerial supervision (Tuanakotta,

2007; Tunggal, 2011). Pressures are the motivation

Collectivist Culture and Fraud Activities on Aceh’s Millennial Workers

to conduct fraudulence in which social statuses

become a pressure for someone to conduct Fraud

(Tuanakotta, 2007; Tunggal, 2011).

The last dimension is rationalization.

Rationalization becomes the essential element within

the incident of fraud because the actors seek for the

justification over their actions. Tunggal (2011)

explained rationalization as a character of attitude or

a set of ethical values that allow managements of

staffs to conduct dishonest actions, or to be in a quite

pressuring environment; making them rationalize

dishonest actions.

2.2 Collectivist Culture

This research used the interpretation of collectivism

culture proposed by Sutampi, Priyatama, and

Astriana (2019). This interpretation was used

because their study developed Hofstede’s collectivist

culture theory for millennial workers in Indonesia,

which parallel with the objective of this research.

The aspects of collectivist culture encompass

(Sutampi, Priyatama, and Astriana (2019): (a) The

relationship between subordinates and ordinates, an

element of relationship exists within an organization

in which subordinates are the protector and ordinates

should be loyal; (b) The relationship between

individuals and groups, the loyalty of individuals

with their organizations, the strength of group bond

that makes the mistake of individuals often

associated with the mistake of groups which should

be bear together; (c) Decision making, deliberation

results, in a case where a discrepancy of a person

will tend to make the group to consider it as a

negative thing; (d) Harmonization, making harmony

as the main element within the group in which

individuals tend to avoid conflicts and disputes; (e)

Communication, in which communication activities

tend to be in a secure position, therefore, direct

delivery of reprimands or mistake will make people

hurt; (f) management system, having a group

management in the practice, every achievement and

success is mentioned as a group outcome, not on a

personal behalf.

2.3 The Relationship between

Collectivist Culture and Fraud

Culture is a freedom value embraced by a

particular community as the determinant of people

behavior in conducting things which should and

should not be done. The boundaries applied by the

community are manifested through behavioral

norms. Every member of the community will act in

accordance with their norms to be accepted in the

social environment, if they don’t; the people will

experience a rejection within that community

environment.

The norm of community which has collectivist

culture is indicated by the importance of

connectedness with other community members.

According to Cozma (2011), there are two

characteristics of collectivist culture proposed by

Trandis, namely vertical and horizontal. The

difference of these two types is on the desire of

individuals within their groups to compete with each

member, or the desire to be equal and suppressing

their personal identities. However, these two types

of culture illustrate the need of community members

to always exist and loyal in following their social

influences.

The typical characteristics of these cultural

norms might have negative impacts if norms or

orders believed by the local community are negative.

Organization members become reluctant to submit

their critics and suggestions toward their leaders

because everyone respects them. This condition

makes the leader to be capable of doing what they

desired. Therefore, fraud activities might happen.

Moreover, fraud can occur due to the availability of

opportunities (Tuanakotta, 2007). Opportunities

become widely open if the organization members

who conceive collectivist culture are very supportive

and not criticizing every activity conducted by their

leaders.

This condition is consistent with the argument of

Albrecht (2012) who explained that the main reason

of fraud is because the actors notice and have

opportunities due to poor control system and

supervision. Individuals have the desire to conduct

fraud and actually realizing it due to the presence of

opportunity factor. According to the argument of the

researcher mentioned above, it can be known that

the emergence of loyalty exists within an

organization with collectivist culture has made the

control/monitoring in the organization to be

improper. This condition makes the opportunity to

conduct fraud to become widely open. This

condition which eventually makes the occurrence of

fraud behaviors on organization members have the

collectivist culture. Therefore, the hypothesis of this

research was:

H1: Collectivist culture positively affects the

emergence of fraud activities with the

opportunity to conduct fraud as the

mediator

ICPsy 2019 - International Conference on Psychology

3 RESEARCH METHOD

This research used purposive sampling as the sample

collecting technique. The characteristics of subjects

in this research were (1) young employees who have

worked for at least six months. The limitation of this

minimum amount was due to the assumption that the

employees are capable to adapt and evaluate their

company environments; (2) young employees aged

between 18-36 years old who have identical

characteristics of generation Y; (3) having minimum

Diploma III degree which indicates that subjects are

capable of profoundly comprehending the scale

given by the researcher. There were 138 research

samples which later be analyzed through data

analysis technique in this research namely the linear

regression. The predictor in this research was

collectivist culture while the criterion in this

research was fraud. The data analysis to observe the

variable of fraud opportunities as the moderator was

moderate regression analysis.

4 RESULT

4.1 Hypothesis Test

According to Table 1, it can be known that the

significance of collectivist culture is 0.004 (p<0.05).

This condition means that the variable of collectivist

culture affects the variable of fraud behaviors.

Table 1: Parameter Significance Test

Model

Unstandardiz

Coefficients

Standar

dized

Coeffic

ients

Sig

Std.

Erro

Beta

(Consta

nt)

46.18

8.81

5.24

.00

Collecti

vist

Culture

062

0086

0.061

0.71

.00

Dependent Variable: Fraud Behaviors

According to the result of R Square (Table 2),

the value shows 0.004 or 0,4%. This result illustrates

that the variable of collectivist culture affects the

variable of fraud activities in the amount of 0,4%,

while the rest (99,6%) is affected by other variables

outside the research.

Table 2: Effective Contribution of Independent Variable to

Dependent Variable.

Model

Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error

of the

Estimate

0.61

0.004

12.444

Predictor: Collectivist Culture

4.2 Moderate Regression Analysis

This test used linear regression analysis in which the

formulation contains interaction elements (the

multiplication of two or more independent variables)

referred to as the product variable. The impact of

moderation in statistics can be seen through the

significance of product variable contribution toward

the dependent variable. The variable tested with

MRA in this research was fraud opportunities. This

variable will be observed whether it can affect the

relationship between independent variable

(collectivist culture) toward dependent variable

(fraud behaviors). A variable can be determined as

moderating if the presence of the variable will

strengthen or weaken the relationship between

independent and dependent variables.

Figure 1: The Relationship of Collectivist Culture on

Fraud Behaviors with Fraud Opportunities as the

Moderator

According to table 3, it can be known that the F-

value = 41.782 with 0.000 (p<0.05) significance

value, thus, it can be concluded that the hypothesis is

accepted. This result means that the variables of

collectivist culture and fraud opportunities are

collectively having significant impacts on fraud

behaviors.

Collectivis

t Culture

Fraud

Behaviors

Fraud

Opportuniti

Collectivist Culture and Fraud Activities on Aceh’s Millennial Workers

Table 3: F-test Result

Model

Sum of

Square

Mean

Square

Sig

Regres

sion

8082.871

4041.43

41.7

.000

Residu

13058.086

135

96.727

Total

21140.957

137

Dependent Variable: Fraud Behaviors

Independent Variable: Collectivist Culture and Fraud

Opportunities

According to table 4, it can be known that the

significance of the variable of fraud opportunities is

0.000 (p<0.05). This result indicates that the variable

of fraud opportunities has a very significant impact

on fraud behaviors.

Table 4: The Significance Test Result of Individual

Parameters

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standard

ized

Coefficie

nts

Sig

Std.

Error

Beta

(Consta

nt)

44.073

6.966

6.326

.000

Collecti

vist

Culture

0.121

0.068

0.120

1.769

.004

Opport

unities

0.089

0.010

0.618

9.096

.000

Dependent Variable: Fraud Behaviors

Table 5: The Result of the Correlation between

Independent Variable and Dependent Variable

Model

Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error

of the

Estimate

0.618

0.382

0.373

9.835

Predictors: (Constant): Collectivist Culture, Fraud

Opportunities

Dependent Variable: Fraud Behaviors

Table 5 explains the effective contributions

provided by the variables of collectivist culture and

fraud opportunities toward fraud behaviors.

According to the value of R Square = 0.382, it can

be known that the contribution of collectivist culture

variable on fraud behaviors moderated by the

variable of fraud opportunities amounts to 38.2%.

Table 6: The Analysis of Variable Indicators

Aspect/Indicator

Mean

High

Medium

Low

Fraud

Opportunities

(Medium)

General

Information

Technical Skills

Fraud

Behaviors

Pressures

36.4

101

1. Keeping

Dignity

5.8

2. Self-failure

8.15

3. External

Business

Factor

8.96

4. Adversity

7.26

5. Improving

status

4.59

121

6. Bad

relationship

with

supervisor

1.63

Rationalization

3.4

Collectivist

Culture

Subordinate-

ordinate

relationship

17.96

Individual-

group

relationship

15.93

Decision

making

11.4

Harmonization

10.36

Communication

20.49

105

Management

system

25.38

According to the data in Table 6, it can be known

that the highest mean on the indicators of fraud

behaviors are external business (8.96) and self-

failure (8.15). In addition, the self-failure indicator

also has the high mean value (8.15). Referring to the

indicator analysis result on collectivist culture, it can

be known that the management system is the

indicator with the highest mean (25.38). On the

other side, harmonization has the lowest mean value

on the variable of collectivist culture (10.36).

5 DISCUSSION

According to the data, it can be known that the

highest mean on the indicators of fraud behaviors

ICPsy 2019 - International Conference on Psychology

are external business factor (8.96) and self-failure

(8.15) indicators. This result illustrates that pressures

faced by organizations to compete with external

environments have made the research subjects to

sometimes conduct frauds to keep their jobs running.

The high mean value of response of subjects

indicates that respondents give high score answers

for each question regarding business external factor.

This result indicates that respondents have conduct

frauds such as covering the weakness of

projects/products, promising something to

customers, or exaggerating the quality of

projects/products to be sold (questions on the scale

of fraud behaviors concerning external business

factor).

In addition, self-failure indicator itself also

acquires high mean value (8.15). This description

illustrates the indication of fraud conducted by

millennial workers due to the pressure given by the

company related to individual performance; making

them to conduct something to covered it. The

conducted frauds can be in forms of an adjustment

of data to cover the deficiency of the actual

procedure, filling or modifying the required

documents by themselves.

Based on the findings mentioned above, it can be

discovered that millennial workers conduct fraud

activities due to the attachment of millennial

workers to their organizations, so they are covering

the weakness of their organizations, and also

because the fulfillment toward the demands of

organizations on their personal performances. These

conditions can be caused by millennial

characteristics which are highly related to their

social environment and having strong bond with

their work which in this context is their

organizations.

These results are consistent with the study of

Elam, Stratton, and Gibson, 2007; Borges, Manuel,

Elam, and Jones (2010) which discovered that

millennial’s are hard-workers, responsible, team

oriented, and altruistic. Discussing in further,

Borges, Manuel, Elam, and Jones (2010) who

studied the difference of gen x and millennial’s

motives by using TAT card have found that

millennial’s have formidable needs toward

achievement and affiliation. This explanation

illustrates that the needs to properly accomplish any

achievement and affiliating socially are demands

required by the millennial generation. On the other

side, Alsop (2008) also supported the perspective

altruism on teenagers who influenced by their

families and peers; making them to be oriented

toward their groups.

The elucidations of several researchers above

which based on the characteristics of millennial

generation describe the relation between the

emergence of fraud activities and millennial

workers. This condition is based on the high

attachment of millennial workers toward their

groups and the altruism conceived by millennial’s

workers that make the indication of fraud activities

on them to be greater. On the other side, the

presence of collectivist culture conceived by Aceh’s

millennial workers is enhancing the condition. One

of the characteristics of collectivist culture is the

presence of high togetherness within the group. This

aspect is consistent with the argument of Hofstede

(2005) who described that collectivist elucidates the

cohesiveness of group, the connectedness between

individuals and community due to the protection

given by the community toward individuals who

loyal to their groups.

Referring to the results of indicator analysis on

collectivist culture, it is known that the management

system indicator was the indicator with highest mean

(25.38). The management system on collectivist

culture bear a meaning that individuals will immerse

themselves to the identity of organizations or group.

In this context, employees will tend to use their

names on behalf of their work divisions rather than

themselves. This condition illustrates that every

success made by them will be showed as the

collective success with their groups. This finding

substantiates the argument in which the presence of

high group cohesiveness and altruism conceived by

millennial workers as well as collectivist culture

exists in Aceh have made the indication of fraud

activities on respondents to grow higher. This

illustration explains why fraud activities have

significant relationship with collectivist culture,

which in this term is associated with external

business factor and management system. The

existence of one-identity principle as the

organization member has made the millennial

workers who conceive collectivist culture to feel that

they should fight for their division as their identity.

This activity leads the millennial workers in this

research to conduct fraud by heralding their

businesses so the customers/stakeholders will have

the trust in their organization (the product/project

they currently sell).

On the other side, harmonization has the lowest

mean value on collectivist culture variable. This

result illustrates that the millennial workers

discussed in this research were having poor harmony

within their organizations. Harmony is the main

element in group dynamics which indicated by rare

Collectivist Culture and Fraud Activities on Aceh’s Millennial Workers

direct confrontations that will emerge conflict or

disunity. According to the data, it can be known that

respondents in this research were daring to express

their dislikes or criticize their co-workers frontally

when mistakes are made. This result becomes an

interesting finding by considering that this behavior

is not the kind of collectivist culture.

Lack of harmonization between respondents in

this research and their work groups can be explained

by the characteristic of millennial’s who tend to

communicate in a frontal manner. Chou (2012)

described that millennial favor open and frequent

communications. That way of communicating makes

the tendency to hurt the feeling of their co-workers

when they speak boldly and frankly. This kind of

behavior is taboo for collectivist culture which is

very normative. The community with collectivist

culture will tend to prioritize the non-hurtful

conversation toward their interlocutors and tend to

be less assertive. Unwillingness to be assertive

which causes lack of harmonization within their

groups despite the closeness of these millennial

workers with their groups.

In addition, the research results of Borges,

Manuel, Elam, and Jones (2010) also support the

emergence of the indication of minimum harmony

amidst these cohesive groups. According to

researchers, millennial generation has high demands

on achievement and affiliation. This finding explains

that regardless of high social support, the need of

millennials to achieve personal success is also high.

These two aspects are surely in practice will cause

disharmony between the organization members. This

finding can be associated with the high effect of self-

failure indicator on fraud variable. This result shows

that each individual has the desire to show the best

individual performance, although they are very

attached to their groups. This practice is eventually

causing millennial workers to be brave in acting

frontally toward the mistake of their co-workers. On

the other side, millennial workers in this research

tend to conduct fraud in their works to avoid being

blame or to be able of presenting the best

performance.

Referring to one of the culture indicators

proposed by Hofstede (2010) namely masculinity

versus feminine, Hofstede had conducted a research

on workers in Indonesia in 1980 which showed the

characteristics of feminine community. Hofstede

illustrated the femininity with a situation in which

the dominant value within the community is the care

toward others (Hofstede, 2010). Arda (2013)

conducted review of Hofstede’s cultural value

indicators on workers in Indonesia. According to

this research, it has been discovered that the mean

values produced by the research have been heading

toward masculinity. This condition elucidates the

presence of the shifting of cultural dimension to

masculinities which encompass money, material,

and personal success that contradictory to the type of

workers in Indonesia in 1980. The study mentioned

above explains that the high demand for

achievement conceived by millennial workers in

Indonesia at present is difference with the past

generation. Basri (2015) produced a result which

showed that masculinity influences the emergence of

fraudulence in paying tax liability.

Based on the explanations above, it can be

known that the focuses of millennial’s are clear

directions and the priority over achievement. This

situation eases the supervisor to disguise credential

information, and to explain to millennial workers in

a very open manner regarding things that become

the personal priority of them. This influence is

magnified by the presence of a sublime power

distance conceived by organizations with collectivist

culture. Arda (2013) illustrated high power distance

from the supervisors-subordinates relationship

which is similar to the relationship between parents

and children in which not only professionally that

has to be emphasized but good manners in act is also

a must.

These conditions describe that despite the

tendency to communicate frontally, millennial

workers stay polite to their supervisors. In addition,

the need for achievement and increasing personal

wealth made millennial workers to merely focus on

their personal goals despite their loyalty to their

groups. Factors mentioned above emerge the lack of

control/monitoring, so they emerge fraud

opportunities. The attitude of millennial workers

who altruistic and conceive collectivist culture that

has high power distance which makes the fraud

opportunities to be greater.

This high power distance will affect the

occurrence of fraud opportunities in two things.

First, the ignorance of millennial workers over the

performance of their supervisors is due to

disinclination, thus, this situation expands the

opportunity for the supervisors to conduct fraud.

Second, the presence of a high power distance that

causes millennial workers to be perceived as having

poor performances by their supervisors, therefore,

they would conduct fraud when there are

opportunities. According to this research, it has been

discovered that the amount of effect generated by

the variable of collectivist culture toward fraud

behaviors was 0,4%. However, when opportunities

ICPsy 2019 - International Conference on Psychology

to conduct fraud are available, the amount of

collectivist culture variable in affecting fraud

behaviors will increase to 38.2%. Albrecht (2012)

explained that fraud occurs mainly because the

actors notice and get the opportunity due to poor

control system and supervision.

Soeharjono (2011) described that the condition

similar to the case above can be solved through two

efforts. First, the supervisor in an organization

should prioritize the conducive leadership, such as

motivating the subordinate to speak boldly, and dare

to tell the truth. In addition, prioritizing conducive

leadership is also reflected from the capability of

supervisors to have tradition and wisdom in

establishing two-way communication between

subordinates and supervisors in harmony in the work

place. Second, effective internal control/monitoring

is required as the “eyes and ears” for leaders and

organization members as the early warning and

detection for control activities in an internal control

system within an organization.

6 CONCLUSIONS

According to research results, it can be discovered

that millennial workers conduct fraudulence during

their work because they want to accomplish personal

achievement properly. In addition, the typical

natures of millennial workers who highly maintain

their affiliation has made individuals to be reluctant

in getting involved to problems unrelated to their

personal achievement. This research suggest the

need of open communication and details from

supervisors and subordinates as well as internal

supervision based on local wisdom to prevent the

occurrence of fraud activities during their works.

This research has limitations, including the age

range which was too expanding. This condition was

caused by the absence of standard references in

determining the age of millennials (generation y). In

addition, the work places of youths in Aceh that

varied have made the research data became more

varied. Future researchers can focus their studies on

a work setting which has similar characteristics;

therefore, the acquired research result can explain

the relationship between collectivist culture and the

emergence of fraud activities on millennial workers

in more details.

REFERENCES

Albrecht, W., et.al. 2012. Fraud Examination.

Connecticut: Cengage Learning.

Alsop, R. (2008). The trophy kids grow up: How the

millennial generation is shaking up the workplace.

John Wiley & Sons.

Arda, D. (2013). Perbandingan Konsep Nilai Budaya

Dengan Menggunakan Kerangka Kerja

Hofstede (Doctoral dissertation, Diponegoro

University).

Basri, Y. M. (2015). Pengaruh Dimensi Budaya dan

Religiusitas Terhadap Kecurangan

Pajak. Akuntabilitas, 8(1), 61-77.

Benesik, A., Machova, R. (2016). Knowledge Sharing

Problems from the Viewpoint of Intergeneration

Management. In ICMLG2016 – 4th International

Conference on Management, Leadership, and

Governance : ICMLG2016 (P.42). Academic

Conferences and Publishing Limited.

Borges, N. J., Manuel, R. S., Elam, C. L., & Jones, B. J.

(2010). Differences in motives between Millennial and

Generation X medical students. Medical

education, 44(6), 570-576.

Chou, S. Y. (2012). Millennials in the workplace: A

conceptual analysis of millennials' leadership and

followership styles. International Journal of Human

Resource Studies, 2(2).

Cozma, I. (2011). How are individualism and collectivsm

measured?. Romanian Journal of Applied Psychology,

13(1), 11-17.

Elam, C., Stratton, T., & Gibson, D. D. (2007).

Welcoming a new generation to college: The

millennial students. Journal of College

Admission, 195, 20-25.

Hofstede, G.J. Hofstede. 2005. Culture and Organizations

: Software of the Mind, 2

edition, McGraw-Hill

USA.

Hoftede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M.

(2010). Cultures and organizations: software of the

mind: intercultural cooperation and its importance for

survival. McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The

Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in

Psychology and Culture, 2(1) at

http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014.

Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The

next great generation. Vintage.

Pyle, M. B. (2011). Culture and regulation: examining

collectivism and individualism as predictors of self-

control. Digital Commons@Georgia Southern

Electronic Theses and Dissertations at

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/443

Richert, A. (2018). Socializing with Robots. In Knowledge

Management in Digital Change (pp. 97-110).

Springer, Cham.

Sakban, A., & Resmini, W. (2018, September). Kearifan

Lokal (Sasambo) sebagai Pedoman Hidup Masyarakat

Multikultural dalam Menghadapi Era Revolusi

Industri 4.0 di Indonesia. In PROSIDING SEMINAR

Collectivist Culture and Fraud Activities on Aceh’s Millennial Workers

NASIONAL LEMBAGA PENELITIAN DAN

PENDIDIKAN (LPP) MANDALA (pp. 61-71).

Shamim, S., Cang, S., Yu, H., & Li, Y. (2017). Examining

the feasibilities of Industry 4.0 for the hospitality

sector with the lens of management

practice. Energies, 10(4), 499.

Soeharjono, H. I. (2011). Pengaruh Budaya Birokrasi

“ewuh-pakewuh” Terhadap Efektivitas Sistem

Pengendalian Intern. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi: Media

Pengembangan Ilmu dan Praktek Administrasi, 8(3),

01.

Sutampi, A., Priyatama, A. N., & Astriana, S. (2019).

Hubungan job embeddedness dan budaya kolektivisme

pada karyawan generasi x dan y di pltd siantan,

kalimantan barat. Psibernetika, 11(2).

Triandis, H. C. (2018). Individualism and collectivism.

Routledge.

Tuanakotta, T.M. (2007). Akuntansi Forensik dan Audit

Investigasi. Jakarta : Salemba Empat.

Tunggal, Amin Widjaja. (2011). Financial Fraud:

Teori dan Kasus. Jakarta: Harvarindo.