Search results

Examines the role of professional associations, governmental agencies, and international accounting and auditing bodies in promulgating standards to foster auditor independence domestically and abroad. Focuses specifically on the role played by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the Securities and Exchange Commission and the US Government Accounting Office. Also looks at other professional associations in banking, industry, and manufacturing sectors dealing with sensitive issues of auditors′ involvement in such matters as management advisory services, operating responsibilities, outsourcing, opinion shopping, auditor rotation, and other conflicts of interest which may impair auditor independence.

Internal auditing assumes an increased responsibility for the evaluation of entity operations as a service to management and the board of directors. Quality assurance review is the process through which assurance is obtained that the internal auditing department’s work is done in accordance with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. This study examines the current practices of quality assurance review in South Africa. Although not all organisations surveyed do perform internal auditing quality assurance reviews, the organisations that do, benefit from them. Various methods are used in practice to perform internal and external quality assurance reviews. This study provides information on the processes and procedures used in quality assurance review programmes.

Practising internal and external auditors regularly find that crucial concepts governing how they operate are the twin terms of independence and objectivity. Part of the problem is that the two terms are often equated. The impact can be conflict with the auditee, misunderstanding with other stakeholders, impairment of efficiency and effectiveness, and role conflict within the internal audit department. The Institute of Internal Auditors is reviewing some of the cherished notions of internal audit in the light of pressures and developments in the business environment. It has already produced a new definition of internal auditing, which, as before, includes the terms independence and objectivity. Consistently, it decided to re‐evaluate these two terms, and established an international research team. This was the briefing submission from the UK, which was highly influential in determining the final product, not yet in the public domain. It considers professional statements and standards, research and developments in both internal and external auditing.

Reviews the success of the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) in enhancing the professional status of both the discipline of internal auditing and the IIA itself. The IIA has established the paraphernalia of a formal professional framework but several factors appear to hold back the professional “project”, the most important of which is the absence of monopolistic control over the discipline. The IIA faces two options for the future. It may wish to proceed further along the path of creating a formal professional framework. Alternatively, the IIA in its current form may be ideally positioned for a new, post‐professional world for which traditional, antiquated professional institutions seem ill equipped.

Two main objectives and they are: to determine whether the internal audit department of the companies listed in the Bursa Malaysia complies with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditors IIA (2000); and, to determine whether compliance to SPPIA will affect the quality of the internal control system of the company.

Two sets of questionnaires were used in the study. Internal auditing practices was measured by the items listed in the SPPIA and the internal control was measured by means of the statement on internal control: guidance for directors of public listed companies. The population used in this study was all the companies listed in the Bursa Malaysia in 2001. This study used both descriptive and inferential analyses.

It was found that management of internal audit department, professional proficiency, objectivity and review significantly influence the monitoring aspect of the internal control system. Scope of work and performance of audit work significantly influences the information and communication aspect of the internal control system while performance of audit work, professional proficiency and objectivity significantly influence the control environment aspect of the internal control system. The study also shows that management of internal audit department, performance of audit work, audit program and audit reporting significantly influences the risk assessment aspect of the internal control system. Lastly, performance of audit work and audit reporting significantly influences the control activities aspect of the internal control system.

The research has contributed to the agency theory with respect to the bonding costs that management has to pay to the internal auditors for the best interest of the principals of the companies. Another important implication pertains to the extent of the internal auditing practices among internal auditors in Malaysian public listed companies. Research has also shown that the compliance with internal auditing practices partially influence certain aspects of the quality of the internal control system.

This is the first empirical study that has linked the compliance of the internal auditing function to the SPPIA and its effect on the internal control system.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) of 1977 and its amendment – the Trade and Competitive Act of 1988 – are unique not only in the history of the accounting and auditing profession, but also in international law. The Acts raised awareness of the need for efficient and adequate internal control systems to prevent illegal acts such as the bribery of foreign officials, political parties and governments to secure or maintain contracts overseas. Its uniqueness is also due to the fact that the USA is the first country to pioneer such a legislation that impacted foreign trade, international law and codes of ethics. The research traces the history of the FCPA before and after its enactment, the role played by the various branches of the United States Government – Congress, Department of Justice, Securities Exchange commission (SEC), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); the contributions made by professional associations such as the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICFA), the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the American Bar Association (ABA); and, finally, the role played by various international organizations such as the United Nations (UN), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). A cultural, ethical and legalistic background will give a better understanding of the FCPA as wll as the rationale for its controversy.

This paper examines the role of professional associations, governmental agencies, and international accounting and auditing bodies in promulgating standards to deter and detect fraud, domestically and abroad. Specifically, it focuses on the role played by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA), the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE), the US Government Accounting Office (GAO), and other national and foreign professional associations, in promulgating auditing standards and procedures to prevent fraud in financial statements and other white‐collar crimes. It also examines several fraud cases and the impact of management and employee fraud on the various business sectors such as insurance, banking, health care, and manufacturing, as well as the role of management, the boards of directors, the audit committees, auditors, and fraud examiners and their liability in the fraud prevention and investigation.

Highlights similarities among the codes of ethics promulgated by professional societies in the United States such as The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA), and the EDP Auditors Association (EDPAA). Takes the Code of Ethics of the Institute of Internal Auditors, an international professional association, as an example to demonstrate that most of the articles of professional codes do not reflect the cultural dimensions of Asian, European, and other countries. Since one single universal code of ethics may not meet the needs of an international group, international professional societies may wish to consider alternatives to incorporate in their codes of ethics, especially the cultural dimensions of other countries. Cultural differences often limit the effectiveness of a uniform international code of ethics because they create a lack of consensus within a profession as to what constitutes acceptable behaviour.

This article deals with internal auditors’ use of and compliance with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, as well as the Practice Advisories, issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). The results reported here form part of a global research project, the 2006 Common Body of Knowledge in Internal Auditing (CBOK) study. The research shows that internal auditors worldwide believe that overall, their organisations comply with the Standards. Reasons for not using the Standards relate to organisational attributes such as management’s perceptions that these do not add value and are too time‐consuming to comply with.

Professional accounting associations in various countries and governmental and other quasi‐official bodies have played an important role not only in the evolution of internal control reporting on a global scale, but also in educating management, investors, financial institutions, accountants, auditors, and other interested parties highlighting the pervasiveness of the effects of a sound internal control structure in corporate reporting as well as other aspects of an organization′s success. These associations include the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the General Accounting Office (GAO), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Cadbury Committee, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales (ICAEW), the Scottish Institute of Chartered Accountants (SICA), the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA), and others. Business failures, management fraud, corporate misconduct, international bribery, and notorious business scandals in all sectors of business have prompted the US government to take drastic action on internal control reporting to safeguard public interest. Several professional and government committees were formed to study this precarious situation: the Treadway Commission, the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission, the Packard Commission, the Cohen Commission, the Adams Commission in Canada, the Cadbury Committee in the UK, and others. The principal motivation for the changing dynamics has been growing public pressure for greater corporate accountability. The government′s pressure on the accounting profession and management of public corporations has been pivotal in spearheading internal control reporting. Examines the role of professional associations, governmental agencies, and others in promulgating standards for internal control reporting, and the impact of legislation on this aspect of internal auditing in the USA and worldwide.