The Internal Auditor′s Relationship with the Audit
Committee

Rezaee, Zabihollah; Lander, Gerald H.

doi:10.1108/02686909310036269

Cited by 31 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such relationships, when they are characterized by regular interactions and an open dialogue, are expected to aid the IAF's pursuit of effectiveness. Thus, IA effectiveness is expected to be influenced by its interactions with SM (Van Gansberghe, ; Mihret & Yismaw, ; Ahmad et al ., ; Cohen & Sayag, ), and with the supervisory board and the AC (Rezaee & Lander, ; Anderson, ; Barma, ).…”

Section: Four Building Blocks: Literature Review and Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probing the Discriminatory Power of Characteristics of Internal Audit Functions: Sorting the Wheat from the Chaff

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to identify, examine and evaluate characteristics of an internal audit function (IAF) that help to distinguish between two groups of IAFs with sharply contrasting levels of perceived effectiveness. Based on survey data from 46 heads of internal audit (chief audit executives, CAEs) in private organizations in Germany, we differentiate IAFs that indicate varying and contrasting levels of internal auditing (IA) effectiveness. In doing so, this study plants the seeds for a potential general theory of IA effectiveness -a theory that may also have relevance in other countries. Extant theory highlights the multi-faceted aspects of IA effectiveness and these are considered in the study to sort its 'wheat from the chaff'. We suggest four key dimensions or categorical blocks: organization, IA resources, IA processes and IA relationships. Within these dimensions, statistically valid discriminatory characteristics and features identified in the study include: the existence of an IA charter that is agreed by the board/audit committee (AC); possible career progression after a tenure in IA; some degree of co-sourcing and outsourcing of IA services; the level of training and professional qualification of IA staff and CAEs; the use of IA technology and risk-based IA; whether IA makes recommendations for improving the governance process and rates individual findings and grades the overall report; whether the CAE has appropriate access to the board/AC; whether the CAE benefits from senior management's (SM) and the board/AC's input to the IA plan; and the CAE's informal contact with SM. Appropriately employed, a mix of these characteristics contribute to a theoretical grounding that may help explain IA effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Four Building Blocks: Literature Review and Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probing the Discriminatory Power of Characteristics of Internal Audit Functions: Sorting the Wheat from the Chaff

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…En plus de la fonction d'audit interne, ces pivots comprennent la haute direction, le conseil d'administration, le comité d'audit et l'audit externe (Gramling et autres, 2004 ;Rezaee, 2005). Nous nous intéressons spécifiquement aux relations entre les auditeurs internes et les membres du comité d'audit, car il s'agit des principaux acteurs de la fonction d'audit interne (Davies, 2009 ;Gramling et autres, 2004 ;Mat Zain et Subramaniam, 2007 ;Rezaee, 2005 ;Rezaee et Lander, 1993 ;Roussy, à paraître ;Sarens, De Beelde et Everaert, 2009 ;Turley et Zaman, 2007).…”

Section: Les Relations Entre L'audit Interne Et Le Comité D'audit Et unclassified

Comment apprécier la compétence d’un auditeur interne ? L’opinion des membres du comité d’audit

Roussy

2013

telescope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article strives to identify how the members of an audit committee assess the competency of an internal auditor in the context of Quebec's public sector. As part of this research, individual interviews were conducted with 14 members of audit committees. The findings show that committee members seek particular values in internal auditors before deeming them to be competent. These results are useful and original, as they bring out values other than traditional "independence" and do not emphasize the competency criteria that are highlighted in existing publications. This article contributes to the literature concerning relations between internal auditor and the audit committee, for it examines their expectations toward one another.Pour citer cet article : Roussy, M. (2012). « Comment apprécier la compétence d'un auditeur interne ? L'opinion des membres du comité d 'audit », Télescope, vol. 18, n° 3,

show abstract

“…In the 1970s, when audit committees performed only basic functions, it was suggested that they should meet four to six times annually—escalating to monthly meetings if they were to assume greater responsibility for receiving reports from internal auditors and becoming involved in an organization's public reporting, operations, policies and procedures (Perry, 1977). Others have suggested the relationship between audit committees and internal auditors must be ‘year‐round’ (Rezaee and Lander, 1993). Hence reports that contemporary audit committees of firms engaged in large and complex businesses are meeting only two or three times a year suggest that members are devoting little attention to the wide range of responsibilities they claim to be addressing.…”

Section: Role and Activities Of Audit Committees—in Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Gaps in Guidelines on Audit Committees

Walker

2004

Abacus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1940s, advocacy of the establishment of audit committees was undertaken by regulatory agencies, and subsequently by the accounting profession, and committees representing combinations of interest groups. Over time, this advocacy literature has reflected changing views about the key responsibilities of audit committees. Initially, audit committees were primarily concerned with negotiations with (or responding to) auditors, and reviewing financial statements prior to publication. Since the 1970s, formal guidelines or requirements have suggested additional responsibilities that involve oversight of the internal management of corporations. There is a pattern of renewed enthusiasm for enhanced corporate governance and for a stronger role for audit committees following spates of corporate crashes or disasters. Nevertheless, some of the lessons from those events continue to be ignored, so that arguably there are gaps in contemporary guidelines on audit committees. These gaps concern the need for audit committees to review the structure and design of delegations, and the adequacy of financial and operational information being provided to senior management and boards (particularly concerning subsidiaries and associated entities). These gaps are also reflected in the charters of the audit committees of Australia's top 200 listed entities. However, in some respects, Australian practice has gone beyond the recommendations embodied in recent guidelines. Drawing from literature and practice, this article proposes a model charter which, if adopted, may contribute to improvements in the effectiveness of audit committees.

show abstract

The Internal Auditor′s Relationship with the Audit Committee

Cited by 31 publications

References 1 publication

Probing the Discriminatory Power of Characteristics of Internal Audit Functions: Sorting the Wheat from the Chaff

Probing the Discriminatory Power of Characteristics of Internal Audit Functions: Sorting the Wheat from the Chaff

Comment apprécier la compétence d’un auditeur interne ? L’opinion des membres du comité d’audit

Gaps in Guidelines on Audit Committees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About