دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی عوامل افزایش کیفیت رابطه ها میان حسابرسان داخلی و حسابرسی ها - وایلی 2017

This study examines the relationships between internal auditors and auditees in an attempt to identify the factors that influence the abilities of internal auditors (IAs) to build high‐quality relationships with auditees. The analysis is based on the responses of 78 Italian Chief Audit Executives who took part in a survey in 2014. The results indicate two factors that are positively and significantly associated with high‐quality IA–auditee relationships: (1) the integration of senior management's inputs in the setting up of audit plans; and (2) the use of the internal auditing function (IAF) as a management training ground. The results also show a positive but marginally significant relationship between the regular revision of audit methodologies and high‐quality IA–auditee relationships. Surprisingly, the results indicate a negative and significant association between the diversification of an IAF's activities and an IAF's ability to create positive collaboration with auditees.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We have examined factors that influence the quality of IA–auditee relationships by using data collected from Italian CAEs. Specifically, we examined whether CAEs' perceptions concerning establishing transparent, collaborative, constructive, and partnering relationships with auditees are associated with IA characteristics drawn from the literature. Overall, more than two‐thirds of the participant CAEs perceived quality relationships with auditees. Further, almost 50% indicated that, in their organizations, auditees consider IAs as their peers and partners. The study results show a positive and significant relationship between an IAF's ability to build quality relationships with auditees and: (1) the incorporation of the SM's inputs into the audit planning; and (2) the use of the IAF as a management training ground. Further, for the regular revision of audit methodologies, the results show a positive and marginally significant relationship with our dependent variable. Regarding factor 1, the findings confirm our initial premise that when the IAF considers the SM's input, the quality of the relationships with auditees improve. An analysis of SM's expectations helps the CAE to understand which activities the C‐suite considers key for them and to support the alignment between the audit plan and the organization's strategic plans. Our results show that the IAF also receives benefits for the audit engagement process, because the SM's input helps IAs to focus more on the risks and controls that are considered the most critical to achieving the business process objectives. This can increase appreciation of and satisfaction with the IAF's work, which allows IA findings and recommendations to be accepted and implemented by auditees. The incorporation of the SM's expectations can enhance IAs' ability “to walk in the shoes” of managers and can facilitate empathy with auditees, helping to establish transparent, collaborative, and constructive relationships. On the other hand, alignment between the SM's expectations and the IAF does not mean that an audit is of high quality if the SM's expectations are low (Lenz, 2012). Thus, the SM's inputs could diminish the IAF's ability to build high‐quality relationships with auditees.