At a systems level, organization theorists, economists, and accountants have viewed the effects of compensation and control systems as the primary sources of employee theft. To understand why theft occurs, it is necessary to examine the relevant research at each of three levels of analysis: personal, social, and systemic. .
Employee Theft at the Personal Level .
When considering the question of why employees steal, researchers focusing on the personal level have attempted to develop demographic or personality predictors of theft. Criminologists, by examining the personal determinants of theft, seek to develop a profile of individuals who are inclined to steal. Employees prone to engage in theft are generally young, face economic pressures, and are emotionally unstable (Hollinger & Clark;, 1983). Individuals with few ties to the organization or community are more likely to steal than those with more extensive linkages (Frank, 1989). Research has also found that workplace thieves are generally new, part-time, or unmarried employees (Murphy, 1993). Hollinger and Clark (1983) suggest that property deviance is more common in low-paying, low-status jobs. In addition, employment in small firms is another salient characteristic, as small firms are more likely to have only one person performing multiple duties involved with merchandise or money, with no checks or balances on such duties (Pedone, 1998). Finally, research suggests that some people steal because they view it as exciting (Hogan & Hogan;, 1989) or do so because of emotional instability (Frank, Lindley, & Cohen;, 1981). .
Research has also explored behavioral predictors of employee theft indicating that individuals involved in employee theft are likely to be involved in other deviant behaviors such as alcohol, and/or drug abuse, and/or gambling (Hollinger & Clark;, 1983). Individuals who are rule breakers enjoy dangerous, forbidden activities and are more likely to steal (Hogan & Hogan;, 1989).