The article seems to contradict itself. It asserts that in boom times the bottom lines are checked less rigorously because money is flowing freely but then also asserts that it's the bad times that has greater fraud risk because of individual incentives. Neither position felt well enough sourced or argued to convince me which is the case, whether fraud is a greater risk in a boom or bust part of a business cycle.
not only that, one example isn't enough to make a rule / establish a pattern.
And we run a customer facing business with lots of potential for fraud and we see an increase in fraudulent behavior with economical crash, but it's the same actors the same incentives, it's not laid off employees as much as professional criminals that need the money more because their other revenue streams are drying up.