عنوان انگلیسی مقاله:

A Post-SOX Examination of Factors Associated with the Size of Internal Audit Functions

ترجمه عنوان مقاله: بررسی پسا SOX عوامل مرتبط با اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی

$$$: فقط 3000 تومان

سال انتشار: 2012

تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی: 26 صفحه

تعداد صفحات ترجمه مقاله: 31 صفحه

منبع: American Accounting Association

نوع فایل: word

http://modir123.com/photo%20site/D-modir123.com%20_2_.png دانلود اصل مقاله

 

فهرست مطالب
  • چکیده
  • مقدمه
  • توسعه تئوری
  • ویژگی های کمیته حسابرسی
  • ویژگی ها و ماموریت حسابرسی داخلی
  • ویژگی های حسابرسی داخلی
  • فعالیت های ماموریت حسابرسی داخلی
  • فعالیت های حسابرسی داخلی صورت گرفته توسط دیگران
  • ویژگی های سازمان
  • روش تحقیق
  • نمونه
  • متغیرهای وابسته
  • متغیرهای مستقل
  • جدول 1
  • ویژگی ها و ماموریت حسابرسی داخلی:
  • فعالیتهای حسابرسی داخلی صورت گرفته توسط سایرین:
  • ویژگی های سازمانی
  • سپس عضویت در یکی از شاخه‎های فعالیتی زیر را کنترل می‎کنیم:
  • نتایج
  • نتایج توصیفی
  • جدول 2: آمار توصیفی
  • آزمون مدل مفهومی
  • نتیجه‎گیری‎ها و محدودیت‎ها
  • ویژگی‎های کمیتۀ حسابرسی
  • منابع

ترجمه چکیده مقاله

این بررسی یک مدل مفهومی سازنده عوامل مرتبط با اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی را در عصر پسا SOX توسعه داده و امتحان می کند. این عوامل شامل ویژگی های کمیته حسابرسی, ویژگیهای حسابرسی داخلی و ماموریت آن, فعالیتهای حسابرسی داخلی صورت گرفته توسط دیگران ( شامل فراهم کنندگان برون سازمانی و سایر بخش های داخل سازمان) و ویژگی های سازمان می باشد. نتایج حاصل از  بررسی 173 شرکت دولتی و خصوصی نشان می دهد که اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی قطعا با : 1) اداره بهتر کمیته حسابرسی 2) تجربه عالی تر سازمانی مدیر اجرایی حسابرسی 3) ماموریت هایی شامل حسابرسی IT 4) استفاده از فناوریهای پیچیده حسابرسی 5) استفاده از یک مدل نیروی انسانی که در آن از حسابرسی داخلی برای توسعه سرپرستی گردشی استفاده می شود 6) اندازه سازمان و 7) تعداد شرکت های تابعه خارجی که متعلق به آن سازمان هست مرتبط می باشد. بعلاوه, اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی بطور معکوس با 1) درصد کارمندان حسابرس داخلی که حسابرسان داخلی مجاز و تصدیق شده هستند 2) حد اطمینان و فعالیت های مطلوب برون سازمانی نسبت به سازمان های خارجی مرتبط می باشد. این نتایج به تالیفات سابق درباره اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی با در نظر گرفتن تعداد متنوعی از عواملی که مرتبط با اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی در عصر کنونی هستند کمک می کند.

کلید واژه ها: حسابرسی داخلی، تخصیص منابع، بودجه بندی، نیروی انسانی

ترجمه قسمتی از مقدمه مقاله

حسابرسی داخلی عنصر کلیدی در اداره یک سازمان, مدیریت ریسک و ساختار کنترل داخلی می باشد. در اصل متعادل کنندگان و نیازمندیهای بورس طالب حضور حسابرسی داخلی برای ثبت کنندگان (یعنی بورس نیویورک NYSE 2002) می باشند. با این وجود سازمان های در تلاشند بدانند آیا سرمایه گذاری هایی که آنان در حسابرسی داخلی می کنند مناسب می باشد یا نه. عملا سازمان ها اغلب جهت تعیین اینکه نقش حسابرسی داخلی بدرستی اندازه گیری شده است یا نه, به داده های الگوگیری (نظیر موسسه پایگاه داده GAIN حسابرسان داخلی یا مقایسه گروه همتایان صنعتی) روی می آورند. اغلب آنالیزهای الگوگیری بشدت بر اندازه سازمان (یعنی دارایی ها, درآمد, تعداد کارمندان) و دسته بندی صنعتی شان ( یعنی شرکت پرایس واترهاوس کوپر PwC 2011؛ موسسه حسابرسان داخلی IIA 2011 (تمرکز دارند. آنها اغلب تاثیربخشی و بازده یک نقش حسابرسی داخلی, حدود وظایف ماموریت حسابرسی داخلی یا اهداف حسابرسی داخلی و استراتژی های نیروی انسانی را در نظر نمی گیرند – که همه فاکتورهایی هستند که باید بر اندازه نقش حسابرسی داخلی تاثیر بگذارند.

هدف از این بررسی توسعه و امتحان یک مدل مفهومی می باشد که عوامل مرتبط با اندازه حسابرسی داخلی را عصر معاصر قانون پسا-ساربانس-اوکسلی (ازین پس SOX) به تفصیل شرح می دهد. اهداف ما فراهم کردن بررسی مفصل و کامل تر عوامل مرتبط با اندازه حسابرسی داخلی می باشد که از طریق الگوگیری ساده قابل دسترس است و انجام یک بررسی با استفاده از داده های پسا-SOX بمنظور توسعه تحقیقات مرتبط قبلی درباره اندازه گیری حسابرسی داخلی می باشد (کارسلو و همکاران 2005؛ باروآ و همکاران 2010).

تحقیق نشان دهنده افزایش در نیروی انسانی و بودجه بندی حسابرسی داخلی از سال 2001 تا 2002 نشان دهنده اهمیتی است که سازمان ها به فواید حسابرسی داخلی و در پرداختن به ریسک های مرتبط طی زمان رسوایی های عظیم حسابداری آمریکا می دهند. (کارسلو و همکاران 2005) از آن زمان به بعد, حسابرسی داخلی بطور فزاینده ای بعنوان جنبه ای اساسی از اداره شرکت, مدیریت ریسکو کنترل داخلی شناخته شده است. (جهت بررسی سارنس (2009) را مشاهده کنید). نیازمندی های SOX نقشی تقویت شده برای حسابرسی داخلی بدنبال داشته و استانداردهای اخیر هیئت نظارت بر حسابداری سهامی عام (PCAOB) در مورد کنترل داخلی حسابرسان خارجی را به وابستگی شدیدشان به کار حسابرسان داخلی ترغیب می کند (PCAOB 2007). مثلا حسابرسان داخلی نقشی محوری در مدیریت ریسک سرمایه گذاری ایفا کرده (گراملینگ و مایرز 2006؛ بیسلی و همکاران 2008), می توانند نظارتی دائمی فراهم کرده (مارکس 2009), کارهای مشاوره ای / رایزنی انجام دهند ( موسسه حسابرسان داخلی 2009) و در تحقیقات پزشکی قانونی شرکت کنند (پولاک و سامنر 2009). این تغییرات نیروی انسانی و بودجه بندی, و اهمیت روز افزون حسابرسی داخلی در دوره معاصر, به تحقیقات و بررسی پسا-SOX ما از عوامل تعیین کننده اندازه حسابرسی داخلی انگیزه می دهد.

ترجمه قسمتی از نتیجه گیری مقاله

در این مقاله ما به بررسی تأثیر عوامل پس از SOX برروی اندازۀ حسابرسی داخلی می‎پردازیم. مدل مفهومی ما شامل متغیرهایی است در زمینۀ: 1) ویژگی‎های کمیتۀ حسابرسی 2) ویژگی‎ها و مسئولیت‎های حسابرسی داخلی 3) فعالیت‎های حسابرسی داخلی که توسط سایرین اجرا می‎شود 4) ویژگی‎های سازمانی. ما مدل خود را براساس یک پرسش‎نامۀ مبتنی بروب از CAE ها بنا نهادیم. داده‎های جمع‎آوری‎شدۀ پرسشنامه را بررسی و به ارتباط مثبت بین‎شان پی بردیم …

چکیده انگلیسی مقاله

This study develops and tests a conceptual model articulating factors associated with internal audit function size in the post-SOX era. These factors include audit committee characteristics, internal audit characteristics and mission, internal audit activities performed by others (including outsourced providers and other divisions within the organization), and organization characteristics. Results from a survey of 173 public and private companies reveal that internal audit function size is positively associated with: (1) better audit committee governance, (2) greater organizational experience of the chief audit executive, (3) missions involving IT auditing, (4) the use of sophisticated audit technologies, (5) the use of a staffing model in which internal audit is used for rotational leadership development, (6) organization size, and (7) the number of foreign subsidiaries that the organization possesses. Further, internal audit function size is inversely associated with: (1) the percentage of internal audit employees that are Certified Internal Auditors, and (2) the extent of assurance and compliance activities outsourced to outsiders. These results contribute to prior literature on internal audit function size by considering a variety of factors that are associated with internal audit function size in the contemporary era.
Keywords: internal audit, resource allocation, budgeting, staffing

مقدمه انگلیسی مقاله

Internal auditing is a key element of an organization’s governance, risk management, and internal control structure. Indeed, regulators and stock exchange requirements demand the presence of internal auditing for registrants (e.g., New York Stock Exchange [NYSE] 2002). Yet, organizations struggle to know whether the investments they make in internal auditing are appropriate. In practice, organizations often turn to benchmarking data to determine whether the internal audit function is appropriately sized (such as the Institute of Internal Auditors GAIN database, or industry peer group comparisons). Most benchmarking analyses focus heavily on the size of the organization (e.g., assets, revenue, number of employees) and its industry classification (e.g., Pricewaterhouse- Coopers [PwC] 2011; Institute of Internal Auditors [IIA] 2011).1 They often do not consider the effectiveness and efficiency of an internal audit function, the scope of the internal audit mission, or internal audit objectives and staffing strategies all factors that should influence internal audit size.
The purpose of this study is to develop and test a conceptual model that articulates the factors associated with internal audit size in the contemporary post-Sarbanes-Oxley Act (hereafter, SOX) era. Our objectives are to provide a more complete examination of the factors associated with internal audit size than is available through simple benchmarking, and to conduct an examination using contemporary post-SOX data in order to extend earlier related research on internal audit sizing (Carcello et al. 2005a, 2005b; Barua et al. 2010).
Research revealing increases in internal audit staffing and budgeting from 2001 to 2002 illustrates the importance that organizations place on the benefits of internal auditing in addressing risks relevant during the time of the major U.S. accounting scandals (Carcello et al. 2005a). Since then, internal auditing has increasingly been recognized as a fundamental aspect of corporate governance, risk management, and internal control (see Sarens [2009] for a review). The requirements of SOX yield an enhanced role for internal auditing, and recent Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) standards on internal control encourage external auditors to rely heavily on the work of internal auditors (PCAOB 2007). For example, internal auditors play an integral role in enterprise risk management (Gramling and Myers 2006; Beasley et al. 2008), can provide continuous monitoring (Marks 2009b), perform advisory/consulting engagements (Institute of Internal Auditors 2009a), and participate in forensic investigations (Pollock and Sumner 2009). These staffing and budgeting changes, and the increased importance of internal auditing in the contemporary environment, motivate our post-SOX investigation of the determinants of internal audit size.
We first start with the development of a conceptual model that reflects a thorough literature search, as well as field interviews with a variety of chief audit executives (hereafter, CAEs) across a broad range of industries. Using insights from this process, our conceptual model includes four determinants of internal audit size: (1) audit committee characteristics, (2) internal audit characteristics and mission, (3) assurance activities performed by others (including internal audit outsourcing providers and assurance provided by other functions within the organization), and (4) organization characteristics. We test this conceptual model using a web-based survey distributed to CAE members by the Institute of Internal Auditors (hereafter, IIA). The survey includes questions related to each of these four determinants, as well as internal audit size in terms of the number of internal audit personnel.

نتیجه گیری انگلیسی مقاله

In this paper, we provide a post-SOX examination of the factors that influence internal audit size. We develop a conceptual model that includes variables related to: (1) audit committee characteristics, (2) internal audit function characteristics and mission, (3) internal audit activities performed by others, and (4) organization characteristics. We test our model using a web-based survey of CAEs. Using data collected from our survey, we find that internal audit size is positively associated with:
Audit Committee Characteristics: the size of the audit committee;  the frequency of audit committee meetings with the CAE; and  audit committee review and approval of the internal audit budget.
Internal Audit Characteristics and Mission:  CAE tenure in the organization;  performance of IT auditing;  the use of a staffing model in which internal audit is used for rotational leadership development; and  the use of sophisticated audit technology.
Organization Characteristics:
 the total assets of the organization; and  the number of foreign subsidiaries that the organization possesses. Further, we find that internal audit size is inversely associated with:
Internal Audit Characteristics and Mission:  the percent of audit staff designated as Certified Internal Auditors.
Internal Audit Activities Performed by Others:  the extent of internal audit activities outsourced to a third party. Together, our results reveal that many of the activities and characteristics of the internal audit function itself are important determinants of its size. These results complement prior literature that finds that internal audit size is based primarily on various organization-related characteristics.
Comparing our results to those of Carcello et al. (2005b) and Barua et al. (2010) (two studies that share a common underlying dataset), we find similar inferences in terms of organization size, the effects of outsourcing, audit committee involvement in the internal audit budget, and audit committee governance in general. Our results differ from theirs in terms of the effects of industry membership (they find positive associations of internal audit size and membership in the financial and services industries, whereas we do not) and organizational complexity (they find no association of internal audit size and foreign subsidiaries, although we note that they include other measures of complexity that are significant, including relative levels of inventory). We view these similarities and differences as a function of a different sampling focus (our sample includes both public and private organizations, whereas theirs includes only public organizations), a different research focus (our focus is broader and includes mission-based activities and alternative staffing models, among others), and a different time period. We also examined other factors not addressed in these previous studies, revealing the importance of the meetings that the audit committee has with the CAE, internal audit’s staffing model, the percentage of internal audit employees that are CIAs, the CAE’s experience in the organization, the extent of use of modern internal audit technology tools, and the effect of an internal audit mission that includes information technology. We view issues related to internal audit size as continually evolving, so we expect that future research will be warranted that reflects ongoing changes in the economic and regulatory environment in which organizations make resource allocation decisions to internal audit functions.
Given the tumultuous years that followed the accounting and internal control failures of the early 2000s, during which many internal audit functions concentrated primarily on financial reporting controls and SOX compliance, our study provides important insights regarding internal audit size now that the function has refocused audit scopes on broader risk management and control issues. The results from this study provide several avenues for future research. First, our results reveal that the mission of internal audit functions varies widely from organization to organization. Further research into how organizations develop their internal audit mission and the impact of that decision is warranted. Such an investigation should consider how internal audit roles and the demand for additional assurance or consulting services evolve within organizations.
Second, we find that the extent to which internal audit functions are outsourced to outside providers is associated with smaller internal audit size. We also present descriptive evidence on the types of (assurance related) activities that are performed by departments outside of internal audit within a given organization, although this type of sourcing does not affect internal audit size. A potential explanation for this lack of association may be that internal audit staff are required to oversee and/or monitor the activities performed by other organizational functions. Further, internal audit staff are likely needed to assimilate the results of these assurance and compliance activities toensure that risk mitigation is adequate. We have begun additional research investigating more  deeply the extent to which organizations rely upon other assurance/compliance functions both inside and outside the organization to maintain an acceptable level of internal control. Future research should consider the coordination and management of these various assurance functions. Specifically, how does management gain assurance that risk management and control objectives are achieved? How do these functions communicate with internal audit, management, the audit committee, and/or the board? What are the costs and benefits of using this approach?
Third, our results suggest that internal audit functions that are used for leadership development purposes (i.e., a rotational staffing strategy) are larger, presumably because the staff have less experience and staff are rotating in and out of the department more frequently. Further research is needed to understand the broader impact, including costs and benefits, of using the internal audit function as a leadership development tool, versus viewing the internal audit function as a desirable career placement.
Fourth, these findings help illustrate the importance of internal audit proving that it is ‘‘value added’’ to the organization. The literature suggests that internal auditing needs to be more involved in providing assurance regarding the effectiveness of an organization’s risk oversight, as well as more reviews of operations (Anderson and Svare 2011; IIA 2009b). Management and audit committees are often looking for more than financial statement compliance, and those internal audit functions that have responded to these greater needs are rewarded with more resources, likely because they are perceived to deliver more value. Future research needs to continue its focus on the value proposition of internal auditing, and how it fits within an overall assurance structure that management and the board need for oversight. There exist limitations to our analyses. While our statistical model of internal audit size is significant, the explanatory power indicates that other factors not included in our model also exist.
This may reflect on the possibility that our conceptual model is incomplete, so research exploring other determinants of internal audit size is certainly warranted, particularly as more time passes following SOX implementation. Another limitation is that our sample only includes those organizations that chose to respond to our survey, and data necessary for estimating our statistical model were, in many cases, incomplete, thereby resulting in further reductions in sample size. Thus, inferences concerning our results should be made with caution, and with the realization that they apply most aptly to the types of organizations in our sample. A further limitation is that although we extensively pilot-tested the survey instrument, it contained response scales that varied considerably in terms of length and labeling, which may have had a detrimental effect on response consistency.
On a related note, while we assume linearity of responses, if the response scales are not uniformly distributed, we acknowledge that interpreting responses becomes difficult. It is also important to note that internal audit functions continue to evolve and change over time. We explored a variety of factors that were not considered in related prior research, and we expect that, over time, additional factors may play an important role in resource allocations to internal audit functions. In addition, prior research (e.g., Carcello et al. 2005b) generally distinguishes between public and non-public companies when performing their analyses, so including both groups, as we have done in this study, may mask differences between the groups. Finally, our paper focuses exclusively on internal audit work performed in North America. We recognize that internal audit development around the world may be at different stages. While we believe the conceptual model should capture staffing and the contribution of internal audit on a worldwide basis, we have not yet tested it globally. We do suspect that immediate needs or regulation of a country for example, another country adopting SOX-like regulation will influence the nature of internal audit work in those countries, as well.

 

 

مطالب مرتبط