
Management Should Never “Crash” Internal Audit’s Executive Session with the Audit Committee
July 23, 2025
How Many Internal Auditors Did It Take Last Year? It Better Take Less This Year!
August 1, 2025Since launching my blog in 2009, I’ve written more than 800 articles on internal audit, risk management, and governance. But if I had to name just one that’s stood the test of time — and the scrutiny of hundreds of thousands of readers — it would be “10 Things Not to Say in an Audit Report.” First published in 2011 and refreshed in 2017, it remains the most-read post I’ve ever authored.
Why has this topic resonated so widely? Because in our profession, how we communicate can matter as much as what we uncover. I learned that early in my career when I presented a draft audit report that was factually sound but tone deaf. The client disagreed with all my findings — yet agreed with every recommendation. When I asked why, they said: “Just look at how you described us.” And they were right. My tone was unnecessarily harsh, and that one misstep nearly derailed the entire engagement.
A well-written audit report can be a catalyst for positive change. A poorly written one can result in confusion, inaction — or even damaged relationships. That’s why I believe it’s time to revisit and refresh the list, drawing not only from my own experience, but from feedback I’ve received over the years and insights gleaned from my new research assistant: ChatGPT. As it turns out, even AI agrees that some phrases are best left out of our reports.
So, here’s my 2025 edition of “10 Things Not to Say in an Internal Audit Report” — updated for today’s internal audit environment:
1. “Management should consider…”
This phrase weakens the urgency of your recommendation. If you suggest that management merely consider doing something, don’t be surprised if they merely consider doing it — and nothing more. Be clear and assertive in your language: “Management should implement,” “should develop,” or “should revise” sends a stronger, more actionable message.
2. Weasel words
Hedging phrases like “it appears,” “it seems,” or “our impression is” can make your report sound unsure, even when your evidence is solid. Management needs to know they can rely on your findings. If you’re confident in your facts, write with clarity and conviction — not ambiguity.
3. Overused intensifiers
Words like “clearly,” “very,” or “significantly” may seem forceful, but they’re often vague and subjective. “Clearly” to one reader may not be so clear to another. Let the data speak. Instead of writing “a significant loss,” state the actual number. Precision always trumps exaggeration.
4. Absolutes like “always” and “never”
Avoid using sweeping statements. Claiming that management never performs a control or always fails to document something invites dispute. Instead, ground your observations in evidence: “Of the 15 transactions reviewed, none were properly authorized” is harder to challenge and more constructive. Besides, if management unearths one example, your “never” assertion is discredited.
5. Adjectives such as “inefficient” or “ineffective”
Words such as “inefficient” and “ineffective” frequently appear in internal audit reports. However, when these terms aren’t clearly tied to specific criteria, they often invite pushback from management. Rather than labeling, we should focus on describing the condition in a way that allows the reader to reach their own conclusion about whether operations were ineffective or inefficient.
6. “Management failed to…”
Your report should identify root causes, not scapegoats. Avoid saying “management failed to…” or “the department neglected to…” Focus instead on the breakdown: “Controls were not implemented,” or “Processes did not align with policy expectations.”
7. “Auditee”
This term has fallen out of favor, but I am still surprised by how often it is used. It implies a passive recipient of scrutiny, rather than a partner in assurance. Consider using “audit client,” “process owner,” or “management” — language that reflects a more collaborative relationship.
8. Unnecessary jargon
Technical audit-speak might impress fellow auditors, but it can alienate business leaders. Unless your audience is steeped in internal control lingo, simplify. If you must use terms like “compensating controls” or “material weakness,” define them. Your report should be understood by executives, not just auditors.
9. Dismissive phrasing like “obviously” or “clearly”
Words like these can sound condescending or sarcastic. Even if the issue seems glaring to you, avoid implying that management missed something obvious. Let the facts speak for themselves — respectfully and objectively.
10. Making the report about “us”
Phrases like “we found,” “we believe,” or “internal audit determined” can come across as self-congratulatory — or worse, accusatory. Instead, use neutral, third-person language: “The review identified…” or “The analysis indicated…” helps keep the focus on the issue, not the internal auditor.
Parting Thoughts
If you’re ever unsure how your writing will land, try what I call the middle-school test: If a bright seventh grader couldn’t understand your report, it may be needlessly complex. Here’s a real example of what not to write:
“During the aforementioned examination of the accounts undertaken by the internal auditors, the team evaluated the cumulative impact of individually immaterial items and in doing so relied on the assumption that it was appropriate to consider whether such impacts tended to offset one another or, conversely, to result in a combined cumulative effect in the same direction and hence to accumulate into a material amount.”
Let’s just say: if the point is that “a lot of little things can add up,” just say that.
Internal audit reports are the voice of our work. They reflect not only what we’ve found but how we see ourselves — as trusted advisors, communicators, and change agents. I have never held myself out to be an expert on internal audit report writing. For those who are looking for more insightful advice on writing better internal audit reports, there are at least two outstanding consultants/trainers that I recommend:
- Sara I. James: Getting Words to Work
- Margie Bastola: Margie Bastolla Facilitations
Finally, remember that the words we choose can either open doors or close minds. Choose wisely.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.





I welcome your comments via LinkedIn or Twitter (@rfchambers).