An evaluation of root cause analysis use by internal auditors

IF 3.3 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
F. Todd DeZoort , Troy J. Pollard
{"title":"An evaluation of root cause analysis use by internal auditors","authors":"F. Todd DeZoort ,&nbsp;Troy J. Pollard","doi":"10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2023.107081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The objective of this study is to increase understanding of internal auditor use of root cause analysis (RCA). The IIA’s Practice Advisory 2320–2: <em>Root Cause Analysis</em> (IIA 2011) states that RCA should be a core competency for internal auditors to provide insight and add value within organizations. However, little is known about internal auditor use of RCA in a profession where normative problem-solving theory and RCA frameworks potentially conflict with professional demands for independence and objectivity. We conduct in-depth interviews with 21 high-level internal auditors with RCA experience to understand use within the profession. The results suggest several overarching themes that have implications for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners. First, we find that internal auditors in practice believe that RCA is a very important tool within the profession. Second, although internal auditors generally claim to understand RCA, we find considerable variation in the ways they approach the construct and implement prescribed processes in practice. Finally, the results indicate that while RCA use is reasonably prevalent among internal auditors, knowledge constraints, resource limitations, and concern about independence and objectivity create considerable variation in terms of RCA approach, rigor, and efficacy within organizations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278425423000236","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this study is to increase understanding of internal auditor use of root cause analysis (RCA). The IIA’s Practice Advisory 2320–2: Root Cause Analysis (IIA 2011) states that RCA should be a core competency for internal auditors to provide insight and add value within organizations. However, little is known about internal auditor use of RCA in a profession where normative problem-solving theory and RCA frameworks potentially conflict with professional demands for independence and objectivity. We conduct in-depth interviews with 21 high-level internal auditors with RCA experience to understand use within the profession. The results suggest several overarching themes that have implications for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners. First, we find that internal auditors in practice believe that RCA is a very important tool within the profession. Second, although internal auditors generally claim to understand RCA, we find considerable variation in the ways they approach the construct and implement prescribed processes in practice. Finally, the results indicate that while RCA use is reasonably prevalent among internal auditors, knowledge constraints, resource limitations, and concern about independence and objectivity create considerable variation in terms of RCA approach, rigor, and efficacy within organizations.

对内部审核员使用的根本原因分析进行评估
本研究的目的是增加对内部审计师使用根本原因分析(RCA)的理解。IIA的执业咨询2320-2:根本原因分析(IIA 2011)指出,RCA应该是内部审计师在组织内提供洞察力和增加价值的核心能力。然而,在一个规范的问题解决理论和RCA框架可能与独立性和客观性的专业要求相冲突的职业中,内部审计师使用RCA的情况鲜为人知。我们对21位具有RCA经验的高级内部审计师进行了深入访谈,以了解该行业的使用情况。研究结果提出了几个对政策制定者、研究人员和实践者具有启示意义的总体主题。首先,我们发现内部审计师在实践中认为RCA是一个非常重要的职业工具。其次,尽管内部审计师通常声称了解RCA,但我们发现他们在实践中构建和实施规定流程的方式存在相当大的差异。最后,结果表明,虽然RCA的使用在内部审计员中相当普遍,但知识约束、资源限制以及对独立性和客观性的关注在组织内的RCA方法、严谨性和有效性方面产生了相当大的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: The Journal of Accounting and Public Policy publishes research papers focusing on the intersection between accounting and public policy. Preference is given to papers illuminating through theoretical or empirical analysis, the effects of accounting on public policy and vice-versa. Subjects treated in this journal include the interface of accounting with economics, political science, sociology, or law. The Journal includes a section entitled Accounting Letters. This section publishes short research articles that should not exceed approximately 3,000 words. The objective of this section is to facilitate the rapid dissemination of important accounting research. Accordingly, articles submitted to this section will be reviewed within fours weeks of receipt, revisions will be limited to one, and publication will occur within four months of acceptance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信