Information security and technological innovations are two major trends to keep an eye on in the near future.  Information security is a major concern for organisations of all sizes and in virtually every industry, especially in the wake of the numerous high-profile data breaches that occurred in 2015.  These breaches show that senior executives must become more aggressive in strengthening information security and preparing for potential breaches.  Also, technology will continue to play a key role in shaping the fraud landscape.  Fraudsters are becoming more innovative in their use of technology and, consequently, their schemes are growing in complexity.  These developments mean that anti-fraud professionals must also adapt to advances in technologies.  

Financial crimes can be among the most complex court cases, and attorneys often need the help of experts not only to develop the case, but also to potentially explain it to a judge and jury.  A case might need technical analysis or call on the court to decide whether a professional standard was violated, and this is very difficult to do without the guidance of a respected expert in the relevant field. 
 
On the other hand, parties typically have to reimburse the expert (or multiple experts) at a substantial hourly rate and pay for travel expenses.  The expert might be required to appear in multiple depositions or proceedings.  In short, it can get expensive.  In cases with small amounts in controversy, expert testimony often is not feasible.  Even in major litigation, parties have hired experts when doing so was not necessary to prove the case effectively.  This mistake could confuse the jury, or the court may refuse to admit the expert testimony.

Whistleblower laws in the U.S. are fragmented—they differ based on jurisdiction, industry, and sector.  The protections available to a federal employee might be very different from those to, say, an employee of a private manufacturing company.  This complexity and the fear of retaliation can have a chilling effect on whistleblowing.  However, the general trend over the past several decades has been for greater protection.  Legislatures have recently passed laws creating or increasing financial incentives for whistleblowing (e.g., programs by the Securities Exchange Commission and the Internal Revenue Service).
 
In the private sector, a modest number of organisations provide financial incentives for whistleblowing.  More commonly, organisations encourage whistleblowing by promoting an anonymous hotline where employees, contractors, customers, or others can report fraud and other violations.  We know from our study on occupational fraud, The Report to the Nations, that tips are by far the most common detection method for internal fraud.  Organisations are increasingly taking advantage of tips by facilitating whistleblowing.

In the age of big data, companies must harness the power of their data to effectively manage their risks, especially the risk of fraud.  To do so, both the fraud risk management program and the data analysis process must be based on a thorough and living risk assessment.  The company must identify where it is most vulnerable to fraud and then implement an analytics framework that digs through the data to find the red flags of those risks.  Additionally, as the amount of data companies have grows, the use of predictive analytics techniques—where the data itself defines what is normal and uses that to identify outliers—helps catch frauds more quickly and mitigate the associated losses.  

Ideally, an organisation will already have a team identified for investigating certain types of misconduct before it happens.  For some organisations, this will mean outsourcing investigative duties.  There are special concerns for investigations that involve executives or owners (common in major frauds).  In these cases, it might be best to obtain outside legal counsel, due to privilege issues that can arise.  Additionally, outside investigators and legal counsel help ensure that an objective inquiry occurs.  Confidentiality is also an important goal for serious misconduct, and having a selected fraud team planned beforehand helps to only provide case information on a need-to-know basis.