Skip to main content
. 2023 Jul 6;9(7):e18002. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18002

Table 2.

Scale items and latent variable evaluation.

Construct and items Weight/Loading t-test
Internal control structure [2]
Control environment (formative scale)*
The governing body/board genuinely called management’s decisions into question and evinced realizable alternatives 0.27 4.01
Managers and management have not been overworked 0.06 1.12
There has been a great deal of variation in control and management tasks 0.23 2.97
The personnel understand the content and responsibilities of their tasks 0.14 1.60
The personnel have demonstrated commitment to honesty and the ethical values of the company through their conduct 0.54 6.34
Risk assessment (formative scale)*
The goals for the company’s operations had credible and, in my opinion, reasonable measures 0.31 3.09
Management actively evaluated both internal and external risks likely to prevent the achievement of goals 0.27 1.88
A risk analysis covering the entire company was carried out during the last year 0.17 1.43
Those in managerial functions were aware of the risks of their areas of responsibility and knew how risk management was implemented 0.35 3.03
In my opinion, the company’s risk analysis and means of protection could have been more efficient (Reversed code) 0.03 0.52
Control activities (formative scale)*
Functioning controls in the company’s processes warned whenever something exceptional occurred 0.35 4.97
As soon as something exceptional and undesired was noticed, it was promptly and appropriately dealt with 0.26 3.55
In the definition of tasks, special attention was paid to authorization and the special demands of tasks 0.40 5.95
In my opinion, the internal control measures should have been stepped up still further (Reversed code) (0.11) 2.58
The entire personnel had updated job descriptions 0.24 3.60
Information and communication (formative scale)*
The personnel had no problems obtaining information about their own work tasks (0.14) 1.64
The reports forwarded to management were sufficiently clear and contained relevant information from the management perspective 0.44 3.59
Sufficient information moved between the different divisions of the company so that the smooth, uninterrupted running of operations could be ensured (e.g., from sales to manufacturing) 0.29 2.35
Our company’s information and communications system was not quite up to date with respect to functions (0.02) 0.46
The work was efficiently coordinated within the function and also with other functions 0.50 5.08
Monitoring (formative scale)*
The operative information used in management was specified to the systems information of financial management 0.11 0.94
Line managers take excellent care of day-to-day control 0.35 2.94
There is active control of how the personnel obey the operating instructions issued (0.18) 1.34
We conducted analyses-based (customer satisfaction, job satisfaction, efficiency) changes during the last year 0.34 3.38
Management has not in the last year requested accounts of the accomplishment of control measures 0.49 3.25
Internal control effectiveness [1]
Operation (CR = 0.89; AVE = 0.66)
Risks of operations are reliably controlled 0.80 42.61
Operational objectives have been achieved in recent years 0.75 28.11
Operations are characterized by high efficiency 0.86 62.92
Control activities support the achievement of operational objectives 0.84 47.01
Financial reporting (CR = 0.84; AVE = 0.57)
In recent years, all finance-related risks were identified in due time 0.78 35.88
I am very satisfied with the effectiveness of the control activities 0.74 31.73
I have full confidence in our financial reporting 0.78 31.42
The risk of a material misstatement in the financial statements is nearly impossible 0.73 23.42
Compliance (CR = 0.88; AVE = 0.64)
Internal guidelines are complied with 0.75 34.26
Violations of laws and standards very seldom occur 0.82 54.09
Risks associated with non-compliance are at an acceptable level 0.86 73.77
I can assure that our company complies with relevant laws and standards 0.77 29.41
Organizational mindfulness [19] (CR = 0.90; AVE = 0.53)
Our company has an organization-wide sense of susceptibility to the unexpected 0.82 32.50
Everyone in our company feels accountable for the reliability 0.65 15.57
Our leaders pay as much attention to managing unexpected issues as they do to achieving formal organizational goals 0.72 24.02
People at all levels of our organization value the quality of their works 0.71 23.46
We spend time identifying how our activities potentially harm our organization, employees, our customer, other interested parties, and the environment at large 0.78 36.47
We pay attention to when and why our employees, customers, or other interested parties might feel peeved or disenfranchised from our organization 0.70 21.43
There is widespread agreement among the members on what we don’t want to go wrong 0.73 24.21
There is widespread agreement among the members about how things could go wrong 0.71 21.70
Organizational ethical behaviors [58] (CR = 0.95; AVE = 0.68)
Top managers of our company regularly show that they really care about ethics 0.76 41.02
Top managers of our company represent high ethical standards 0.73 34.16
Top managers of our company guide decision-making in an ethical direction 0.74 37.43
Management in our company disciplines unethical behaviors when they occur 0.76 40.27
Employees in our company accept organizational rules and procedures regarding ethical behaviors 0.76 43.47
Organizational rules and procedures regarding ethical behavior serve only to maintain our company's public image (Reversed code) 0.74 35.80
Penalties for unethical behaviors are strictly enforced in our company 0.72 36.36
Ethical behaviors are the norm in our company 0.74 35.79
Ethical behaviors are rewarded in our company 0.73 36.17

Notes: CR: composite reliability; AVE: Average variance extracted; *: CR and AVE are not applicable for formative constructs.