报告线和联合审查对内部审计有效性的影响

IF 2.8 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Yusun Jung, M. Cho
{"title":"报告线和联合审查对内部审计有效性的影响","authors":"Yusun Jung, M. Cho","doi":"10.1108/maj-10-2020-2862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to examine the extent to which two commonly recommended information sharing and communication interventions, direct reporting lines between the internal audit function (IAF) and the audit committee (AC) and their joint reviews of internal audit standards and procedures, improve the internal audit in the continuous audit control and monitoring efforts.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study uses data from the Audit Intelligence Suite-Benchmarking (AIS) Report for the years 2007 to 2016 published by the Institute of Internal Auditors. The authors test the research hypotheses using the ordinary least squares regression method.\n\n\nFindings\nFunctional reporting lines from the IAF to the AC positively impact the internal audit, but administrative lines have a negative impact. Reviews conducted jointly between the IAF and the AC positively influence the internal audit. The impacts of reporting lines and joint reviews are also associated with accounting complexity within a given industry, organizational control structure, organizational scope and the level of IAF’s responsibilities over internal control environment to comply with Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nBecause the study uses AIS data, operationalization of variables is constrained to items in the given data set. Future studies, including field studies, may identify other variables and measures using diverse data sources. This study expands the knowledge of effective means of information sharing and communication to enhance interactions between the IAF and the AC.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe results suggest that the use of reporting lines should correspond to accounting complexity, organizational control structure, organizational scope, and reliance on the IAF in handling SOX responsibilities. They also highlight the importance of joint reviews between the IAF and AC in ensuring a high-quality internal audit.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe authors envisioned reporting lines and joint reviews as an excellent tool to balance the relationship between the IAF and the AC for continuous internal auditing beyond generating internal audit reports according to the US Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission framework Principle 14.\n","PeriodicalId":47823,"journal":{"name":"Managerial Auditing Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impacts of reporting lines and joint reviews on internal audit effectiveness\",\"authors\":\"Yusun Jung, M. Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/maj-10-2020-2862\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to examine the extent to which two commonly recommended information sharing and communication interventions, direct reporting lines between the internal audit function (IAF) and the audit committee (AC) and their joint reviews of internal audit standards and procedures, improve the internal audit in the continuous audit control and monitoring efforts.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis study uses data from the Audit Intelligence Suite-Benchmarking (AIS) Report for the years 2007 to 2016 published by the Institute of Internal Auditors. The authors test the research hypotheses using the ordinary least squares regression method.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nFunctional reporting lines from the IAF to the AC positively impact the internal audit, but administrative lines have a negative impact. Reviews conducted jointly between the IAF and the AC positively influence the internal audit. The impacts of reporting lines and joint reviews are also associated with accounting complexity within a given industry, organizational control structure, organizational scope and the level of IAF’s responsibilities over internal control environment to comply with Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nBecause the study uses AIS data, operationalization of variables is constrained to items in the given data set. Future studies, including field studies, may identify other variables and measures using diverse data sources. This study expands the knowledge of effective means of information sharing and communication to enhance interactions between the IAF and the AC.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nThe results suggest that the use of reporting lines should correspond to accounting complexity, organizational control structure, organizational scope, and reliance on the IAF in handling SOX responsibilities. They also highlight the importance of joint reviews between the IAF and AC in ensuring a high-quality internal audit.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe authors envisioned reporting lines and joint reviews as an excellent tool to balance the relationship between the IAF and the AC for continuous internal auditing beyond generating internal audit reports according to the US Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission framework Principle 14.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":47823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Managerial Auditing Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Managerial Auditing Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-10-2020-2862\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managerial Auditing Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-10-2020-2862","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目的本文旨在考察两种通常建议的信息共享和沟通干预措施,内部审计职能部门(IAF)和审计委员会(AC)之间的直接报告关系及其对内部审计标准和程序的联合审查,在多大程度上改进内部审计在持续审计控制和监督工作中的作用。设计/方法/方法本研究使用了内部审计师协会发布的2007年至2016年审计情报套件基准(AIS)报告中的数据。作者采用普通最小二乘回归方法对研究假设进行了检验。发现从IAF到AC的职能报告线对内部审计有积极影响,但行政线有负面影响。IAF和AC联合进行的审查对内部审计产生了积极影响。报告线和联合审查的影响还与给定行业内的会计复杂性、组织控制结构、组织范围以及IAF对内部控制环境的责任水平有关,以遵守2002年《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》。研究限制/含义由于该研究使用了AIS数据,变量的可操作性被限制为给定数据集中的项目。未来的研究,包括实地研究,可能会使用不同的数据来源来确定其他变量和衡量标准。这项研究扩展了信息共享和沟通的有效手段的知识,以增强IAF和AC之间的互动。实际含义。结果表明,报告线的使用应与会计复杂性、组织控制结构、组织范围以及在处理SOX责任时对IAF的依赖相一致。它们还强调了IAF和AC之间联合审查在确保高质量内部审计方面的重要性。独创性/价值作者设想,报告线和联合审查是一种极好的工具,可以平衡IAF和AC之间的关系,以便在根据特雷德韦委员会框架原则14生成内部审计报告之外进行持续的内部审计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impacts of reporting lines and joint reviews on internal audit effectiveness
Purpose This paper aims to examine the extent to which two commonly recommended information sharing and communication interventions, direct reporting lines between the internal audit function (IAF) and the audit committee (AC) and their joint reviews of internal audit standards and procedures, improve the internal audit in the continuous audit control and monitoring efforts. Design/methodology/approach This study uses data from the Audit Intelligence Suite-Benchmarking (AIS) Report for the years 2007 to 2016 published by the Institute of Internal Auditors. The authors test the research hypotheses using the ordinary least squares regression method. Findings Functional reporting lines from the IAF to the AC positively impact the internal audit, but administrative lines have a negative impact. Reviews conducted jointly between the IAF and the AC positively influence the internal audit. The impacts of reporting lines and joint reviews are also associated with accounting complexity within a given industry, organizational control structure, organizational scope and the level of IAF’s responsibilities over internal control environment to comply with Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002. Research limitations/implications Because the study uses AIS data, operationalization of variables is constrained to items in the given data set. Future studies, including field studies, may identify other variables and measures using diverse data sources. This study expands the knowledge of effective means of information sharing and communication to enhance interactions between the IAF and the AC. Practical implications The results suggest that the use of reporting lines should correspond to accounting complexity, organizational control structure, organizational scope, and reliance on the IAF in handling SOX responsibilities. They also highlight the importance of joint reviews between the IAF and AC in ensuring a high-quality internal audit. Originality/value The authors envisioned reporting lines and joint reviews as an excellent tool to balance the relationship between the IAF and the AC for continuous internal auditing beyond generating internal audit reports according to the US Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission framework Principle 14.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
13.80%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The key areas addressed are: ■Audit and Assurance (financial and non-financial) ■Financial and Managerial Reporting ■Governance, controls, risks and ethics ■Organizational issues including firm cultures, performance and development In addition, the evaluation of changes occurring in the auditing profession, as well as the broader fields of accounting and assurance, are also explored. Debates concerning organizational performance and professional competence are also covered.
×
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