<![CDATA[Background: Financial statement fraud is difficult to detect because the people able to manipulate reporting often understand the control system. Forensic accounting adds value by combining accounting knowledge, investigative reasoning, digital evidence and a willingness to test explanations against alternative scenarios. Aims: This article examines the mechanisms that connect the topic to organizational or policy performance and identifies the conditions that make those mechanisms stronger or weaker. Research Method: A structured narrative review integrates peer-reviewed research with authoritative policy, statistical, and professional sources, including IFRS Foundation (2023a); COSO (2013). Sources are coded by outcome, mechanism, boundary condition, and practical implication. Results and Conclusion: The synthesis indicates that outcomes are heterogeneous. Analytics alone does not discover intent. Unusual transactions can be legitimate, and fraudulent reporting can be designed to look ordinary, so detection depends on professional skepticism and evidence that connects numbers to business reality. Six recurring themes show that implementation quality, information, capability, and institutional context frequently matter as much as the headline policy or technology. Contribution: The article offers an evidence-based framework for forensic accountants, auditors and governance bodies that translates the literature into decision principles without claiming primary data that were not collected.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
