Internal audit: the expert in providing comfort to the audit committee. The case of risk management and internal control
AbstractThis study investigates to what extent audit committees feel uncomfortable about risk management and internal control, and focuses on how internal audit can be the expert in providing comfort in these areas, building upon the sociology of professions literature. Four case studies reveal that audit committees need comfort with respect to the control environment. Thanks to their internal position, their familiarity with the company, and their position close to people across the company, internal audit seems to be the most suitable one to provide comfort and be the ‘guard of the corporate culture’. Furthermore, audit committees need comfort regarding the internal controls in high-risk areas. Besides internal audit’s assurance role, active involvement in the improvement of these internal controls provides a significant level of comfort to the audit committee. Their unique conceptual and companyspecific knowledge about risk management and internal control, combined with the right inter-personal skills, enables internal audit to provide this comfort. Formal audit reports and presentations, together with informal contacts, seem to be important ways of providing this comfort. Finally, it becomes clear that the overall level of comfort in the audit committee can be enhanced through a ‘joint audit approach’ between internal and external audit.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration in its series Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium with number 06/428.
Length: 34 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2006
Date of revision:
internal audit; audit committee; risk management; internal control; comfort; expert; sociology of professions; case studies;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Covaleski, Mark A. & Dirsmith, Mark W. & Rittenberg, Larry, 2003. "Jurisdictional disputes over professional work: the institutionalization of the global knowledge expert," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 323-355, May.
- Laura F. Spira, 2003. "Audit Committees: begging the question?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 180-188, 07.
- Gendron, Yves & Bedard, Jean, 2006. "On the constitution of audit committee effectiveness," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 211-239, April.
- Stuart Turley & Mahbub Zaman, 2004. "The Corporate Governance Effects of Audit Committees," Journal of Management and Governance, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 305-332, 06.
- Paul Collier & Mahbub Zaman, 2005. "Convergence in European Corporate Governance: the audit committee concept," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 753-768, November.
- Norman, Carolyn Strand & Rose, Jacob M. & Suh, Ik Seon, 2011. "The effects of disclosure type and audit committee expertise on Chief Audit Executives' tolerance for financial misstatements," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 102-108, February.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.