Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyse and comment on recent enhanced pronouncements on internal auditing.

The paper uses content analysis of five 2012-2013 sources of guidance, set out in the tables of this paper and summarised within the text, together with conceptual interpretations.

Recent pronouncements respond, with considerable consensus, to stakeholder and public concerns and fill a partial vacuum left by The Institute of Internal Auditors' Standards. Principally this is about successfully enhancing the scope of internal audit and internal audit's independence from management.

While the paper is conceptual rather than empirical, it builds on the processes followed by the parties who developed the examples of enhanced guidance reviewed in this paper. Those processes included careful development by leaders in the field, public consultation of preliminary proposals, and final amended guidance based on feedback received.

There are implications for staffing of internal audit functions and the seniority and calibre of chief audit executives.

There has been no other attempt to map these developments. It has been done with a view to identifying possible ways forward for internal auditing, especially those which have a high degree of support and which are still to be incorporated into generally accepted internal auditing.

The developing role of information is explored within modern business, and in particular the use of strategic information systems to gain competitive advantage. It is suggested that IT requires significant redesign of enterprises with regard to organisation, behaviour, direction and planning.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether there is a significant deficit in the assurance needs of boards and, if so, what might be done to fill this gap and whether internal auditors have a role to play in this.

Contemporary examples of boards being taken by surprise are analysed, making extensive use of high quality reports and other information. The role played by internal audit, both in these cases and with reference to what is currently regarded as “best practice” is explored to assess internal audit's potential to evolve to meet the challenge.

Boards are exposed to a partial assurance vacuum which urgently needs to be filled. If internal audit can make a further quantum leap, as internal audit has done in other respects in the past, then internal audit may fulfil this need.

This research is based on the plentiful information in the public domain which has been sufficient to reliably support the conclusions drawn.

Nothing less than a root and branch revamp of internal auditing is called for. If responded to, the rewards for internal audit and the added value for boards and their stakeholders will be massive.

While internal auditors are tentatively moving into the audit of governance processes, this paper argues that internal audit must be much bolder to become a respected corporate governance partner to the board.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how internal auditing may recover from being one of the corporate governance gatekeepers that failed to prevent the global financial crisis.

This paper draws on the theory of professions and provides a brief analysis of internal auditing history, ending with an appraisal of contemporary status.

Internal auditing has not been “fit for purpose” and can be enhanced. Low expectations of internal audit are currently addressed by enhanced guidelines from a number of parties. Internal audit needs to move firmly into the corporate governance space – to audit corporate governance more effectively and to provide more dependable assurance to boards.

The global Institute of Internal Auditors can use recent enhanced internal auditing guidelines as a springboard to regain their lead. Internal audit needs to cut the umbilical cord that ties it to management. The accepted “dual reporting” of internal audit is flawed.

Society cedes professional status to an occupational group when it is in society’s best interests to do so. An attribute of a profession is its accent on serving the public interest. It is unsatisfactory that, five years after the global financial crisis broke, the international Standards for internal auditing still do not articulate the correct professional conduct on making external disclosures in the public interest when internal auditors are aware of serious wrongdoing not satisfactorily addressed internally.

This paper comprises a conceptual analysis to challenge the internal audit profession.

Aims to consider whether non‐executive directors add value.

A discussion based on current and recent trends in thinking about the role of non‐executive directors.

Considering the effect of the non‐executive director is not quite the same as addressing “the effective non‐executive director”. Do non‐executive directors have any effect and, if so, what are the effects and to what extent? Of course, positive answers to these questions would suggest tests to apply in determining whether someone has what it takes to make an effective contribution as a non‐executive director. This would also assist in determining the scope of the evaluation of the performance of each non‐executive director – which is now very much part of the 2003 Combined Code on Corporate Governance.

This paper offers useful insights into the roles of non‐executive directors.

Auditing involves a high degree of interaction with clients and colleagues if it is to be successful. We need therefore to be more aware of the psychological factors related to audit work.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and interpret expectations of regulators about the interface between regulators and internal audit.

Contemporary pronouncements are subjected to a content analysis about the relationship demands that regulators place upon internal audit. Comparison is made with internal auditing standards. The paper identifies the significant challenges and considers the future.

Regulators are increasingly prescriptive about what they expect from internal audit. The scope of internal audit work must cover all matters of interest to the regulator. Internal audit is now regarded as part of the supervisory process. Unlike financial reporting and external auditing, there is no attempt to regulate the setting of internal audit standards, but regulators themselves are enunciating internal audit requirements that go beyond the standards.

The paper draws mainly upon developments in the financial sector, which is leading the way in prescribing the interface between regulator and internal audit.

The enhanced requirements of regulators impact upon internal audit's other relationships on the internal audit universe and scope, and on staffing internal audit.

This is the first attempt to synthesise what regulators currently require from their relationship with internal audit, which needs to be reflected in internal audit charters and in future releases of global internal auditing standards.

True to form, it is no surprise that ‘public interest entity’ (which, by EC requirement, must include all listed companies but other entities only at the discretion of individual member states) has been defined in the United Kingdom in the minimal permissible way – it excludes large privately held companies, mutuals, large professional partnerships and so on – about all of which the public has a real interest – as the current financial crisis has clearly shown. Think, for instance, of the need to widen choice in the audit market.

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the development of the practice and understanding of audit assurance.

A broad approach is taken, embracing the audit of financial statements, internal auditing and other forms of assurance. The paper endeavours to place this subject within the context of the philosophy of auditing. The paper addresses, and seeks to explain, the need for assurance in contemporary society, how assurance is achieved and the forms in which assurance is given. Finally, the future and the central, even enhanced, role that assurance is likely to play going forward are looked at.

The paper suggests several drivers behind the need for assurance in contemporary society, including systems complexity, ethical laxity, enhanced risks and the accountability obligation. The indicators are that the imperative for assurance will grow rather than diminish into the future, and that “fuzzy auditing” will assume a larger role.

Being conceptual rather than empirical, this paper makes observations and assertions, the latter in particular being amenable to further research, especially of an empirical nature.

There are many practical implications arising from this study. Amongst these are the form “the assurance profession” is likely to take in the future, the need to redefine approaches to assurance engagement and audit standards, the need for greater flexibility in defining what is capable of being audited, and the future form of assurance reports.

This paper is of value in that it explores and discusses developments and challenges in the provision of assurance services, in the context of both internal and external auditing.