Search results

Quality Assurance and Improvement Program (QAIP) is defined as “an ongoing and periodic assessment of the entire spectrum of audit and consulting work performed by the internal audit (IA) activity”. QAIP is an important component of internal auditors’ commitment to improve internal audit (IA) quality. The pressure towards improvement is urgent for central banks, in light of the vulnerabilities of their IA functions identified by the International Monetary Fund. The authors analyse the professional standards and the literature on IA and QAIP, aiming to propose general considerations to enhance IA quality and to develop and maintain a QAIP, with reference to central banks, also shedding light on the synergies among IA, QAIP and total quality management (TQM).

This paper reviews the most relevant professional standards in light of the professional and academic literature regarding IA quality, QAIP and their relationship with TQM. The analysis of these sources represents an important step to identify general measures to improve IA quality and develop effective QAIP in central banks.

This analysis shows that it is important to understand the rationale behind the development of an IA function and its theoretical and practical foundation, especially for complex organisations such as central banks. In addition, the authors show that QAIP represents an important tool to exploit the synergies between TQM and IA. These synergies could result in higher levels of quality for the IA function and more effective implementation of TQM within the whole organisation. Lastly, the authors provide practical suggestions to support the implementation of an effective QAIP in central banks and to spread TQM philosophy within the organisation.

The authors contribute to the scant literature on IA quality and QAIP by focusing on central banks and shedding light on the relationship with TQM. Regardless of their importance, these topics have been largely neglected by the extant literature.

Within the stream of research on public sector accounting standards, heritage asset accounting represents a difficult and challenging issue. This paper intends to join the debate on heritage reporting by carrying out a critical review of the Consultation Paper (CP) “Financial Reporting for Heritage in the Public Sector” issued by the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) in order to highlight its strengths and weaknesses and to make recommendations.

To this end, the current study adopts document analysis as a qualitative research method by referring to Italy as a typical and critical case study. Moreover, the authors actively took part in the Italian working group on heritage assets reporting, so they are well-informed people about the Italian point of view as well as the broad discussion underpinning the Italian response.

Evidence demonstrates that, although the proposals included in the CP represent a new step towards an organic regulation of heritage asset reporting, if these preliminary views are confronted with the reality of an emblematic context, as in the Italian case, much room for improvement remains regarding the definition, recognition, measurement and disclosure of such assets.

The originality of the paper lies in its contribution to overcoming the current controversial aspects of heritage assets reporting and the issuing of an accounting standard. In doing so, the authors also attempt to answer the call made by Anessi-Pessina et al. (2019) to investigate in detail an individual country experience to better understand the state of the art in national and international accounting standards on heritage assets.