PurposeThis study aims to critically analyse the independence of the internal audit function through its relationship with management and the audit committee.Design/methodology/approachResults are based on a critical comparison of responses from questionnaires sent out to Australian chief audit executives (CAEs) versus existing literature and best practice guidelines.FindingsWith respect to the internal audit function's relationship with management, threats identified include: using the internal audit function as a stepping stone to other positions; having the chief executive officer (CEO) or chief finance officer (CFO) approve the internal audit function's budget and provide input for the internal audit plan; and considering the internal auditor to be a “partner”, especially when combined with other indirect threats. With respect to the relationship with the audit committee, significant threats identified include CAEs not reporting functionally to the audit committee; the audit committee not having sole responsibility for appointing, dismissing and evaluating the CAE; and not having all audit committee members or at least one member qualified in accounting.Originality/valueThis study introduces independence threat scores, thereby generating analysis of the internal audit function's independence taking into account a combination of threats.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper finds evidence for the growing importance of informal interactions between the internal audit function and the audit committee (AC) in Australia -a relatively unexplored topic in the literature -using a survey of Chief Audit Executives (CAEs). It also describes the nature of these informal interactions. The most innovative elements of this paper are the findings that certain personal characteristics of CAEs, the specific knowledge and expertise of the AC chair, as well as some of the AC chair's personal characteristics are associated with the existence (and increase) of informal interactions.

This study seeks to identify the characteristics causing tensions in the move towards a corporate culture in Australian public universities. The findings reveal ongoing structural, competency and behavioral issues contributing to the tensions. Two theoretical propositions have emerged regarding the status of the change process. First, the change to a corporate culture is slow but continuing. Second, universities have accepted that public sector, collegial and corporate cultures have to co‐exist, thus adopting an adapted version of new public management (NPM). These findings provide avenues for further research to confirm both the characteristics and theoretical propositions.