IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/medarp/medar-07-2018-0367.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The views of privacy auditors regarding standards and methodologies

Author

Listed:
  • Alan Toy
  • David Lau
  • David Hay
  • Gehan Gunasekara

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to uncover the practices of different privacy auditors to reveal the extent of any similarities in such practices. The purpose is to investigate the drivers of practices used by privacy auditors and to identify potential for improvements in the practice of privacy auditing so that privacy audits may better serve stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach - Six semi-structured interviews with seven privacy auditors and regulators and an analyst across Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the USA are used as the basis for our analysis. Findings - The study shows that some privacy auditors view privacy as an organizational issue, which means that all staff within an organization should understand the privacy issues that are relevant to the organization and to its customers. Because this practice goes beyond a mere compliance approach to privacy auditing, it indicates that there is a way to avoid the approach of merely applying standards from national data privacy laws which is an approach that has been subject to criticism because it is not applicable to the current situation of global applications and cross-border data. The interview themes demonstrate that privacy audits face significant challenges, such as the lack of a privacy auditing profession and the difficulty of raising the awareness of organizations and individuals regarding information privacy rights and duties. Originality/value - Privacy auditing is mostly unexplored by academic research and little is known about the drivers behind the practice of privacy auditing. This study is the first to document the views of privacy auditors regarding the practices that they use. It also presents novel results regarding the drivers of the practice of privacy auditing and the interests of the beneficiaries of privacy audits. It builds on research that argues for the existence of best practices for privacy (Toy, 2013; Toy and Hay, 2015) and it extends this argument by providing reasons why privacy auditors may benefit from the use of best practices for privacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan Toy & David Lau & David Hay & Gehan Gunasekara, 2019. "The views of privacy auditors regarding standards and methodologies," Meditari Accountancy Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 27(3), pages 366-398, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:medarp:medar-07-2018-0367
    DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-07-2018-0367
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MEDAR-07-2018-0367/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MEDAR-07-2018-0367/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/MEDAR-07-2018-0367?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:medarp:medar-07-2018-0367. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.