logo-newlogo-newlogo-newlogo-new
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Audit Trail Academy
  • Advisory Services
  • Books
✕
  • Home
  • Chambers on Internal Audit
  • Internal Auditing Reputation
  • Six Signs You May Be the “Internal Guard-it” Department

Six Signs You May Be the “Internal Guard-it” Department

How Internal Auditors Quietly Foster Trust in Capital Markets
June 28, 2021
5 Steps to Avoid Career Burnout
July 12, 2021
July 5, 2021

Traditionally, internal audit was seen as a value protection element in the organization’s system of risk management and controls. It helped organizations protect value through a heavy emphasis on assurance on the effectiveness of financial, compliance and operational risks. However, over the past 30 years, internal audit has undergone a number of transformational changes. The late 1990’s brought greater emphasis on consulting and advice in addition to traditional assurance engagements. In the early 2000’s, The IIA Standards were revised to emphasize risk-based auditing to require internal audit undertake a risk assessment at least annually as part of its audit planning process. The past decade has witnessed the profession expanding the portfolio of risks it addresses to include organizational culture, the environment, sustainability, governance and more.

As the profession has demonstrated its versatility, a widespread shift in expectations has occurred. No longer is internal audit seen as simply a protector of value in many organizations. The IIA’s 2030 vision is one in which “internal audit professionals will be universally recognized as indispensable to protecting and enhancing organizational value.” And, further, in the most recent update to the International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF), The IIA added a mission statement for internal audit that reads, “to enhance and protect organizational value by providing risk-base and objective assurance, advice, and insight.” The task force working on this at the time, purposely placed emphasis on the word “enhance”, placing it before “protect”, due to the importance of this concept.

Some internal audit departments are already there, and others are on a journey to get there. Unfortunately, far too many internal audit departments are content with the role of value protectors. I have begun to refer light-heartedly to these internal audit departments as internal guard-it departments.

Don’t get me wrong. Internal guard-it departments do add value to their organizations. For, organizations cannot grow, prosper and add value for their stakeholders/shareholders if the assets and resources of the organization are unprotected. Without assurance that risks are effectively managed and that controls have been designed and effectively implemented, organizations face greater risks and challenges in achieving their objectives. However, internal guard-it departments are not realizing their full potential, and their focus on hindsight and even insight often fails to help their organizations avoid the hazards that lie ahead. This “protect value” work is viewed by some as baseline work.

Obviously, there is no formal definition for an internal guard-it department. However, I have identified 5 signs that your department might be one:

  • More than 20% of your annual internal audit plan is focused on compliance risks. Every organization faces statutory and regulatory compliance risks. Obviously, such risks are more significant in highly regulated industries such as financial services and healthcare, so the amount of time that internal audit departments will dedicate to compliance risk assurance will certainly vary. Over the past two years, The IIA’s annual Pulse survey has revealed the average time dedicated to compliance-regulatory risks is about 15% in North America. There is no magic threshold that signals a lack of focus on value enhancement, but every percent of your audit plan dedicated to compliance risks is one less percent being dedicated to foresight and value enhancement.
  • Internal audit is responsible for SOX compliance. The passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002 was jokingly referred to at the time as the “full employment act for internal auditors.” Many internal audit functions were created to help their companies address the Act’s focus on financial reporting controls, and many more saw their budgets and staffing increase substantially in the face of SOX requirements. Over the last 20-years the overall percentage of internal time dedicated to internal control over financial reporting (IFCR) has stabilized in the United States, but it still remains substantially higher than other regions of the world. Over the past two years, The IIA’s annual Pulse survey revealed about 16% of internal audit resources are dedicated to ICFR. From my experience, the average is heavily influenced by the fact that in some publicly traded companies, internal audit is solely, or predominately, responsible for ICFR testing.
  • You take a cyclical approach to some of all of your audit coverage. When I first joined the internal audit profession more than four decades ago, the annual plan for my internal audit department was cyclically-based. It was an approach that ensured coverage of each area of operations every three years for our organization. There was little relationship between audit coverage and the risk the areas presented to the organization (other than, possibly, the frequency with which things were reviewed). In 2002, The IIA standards were revised to mandate that the audit plan be based on a risk assessment undertaken at least annually. Unfortunately, even today cyclical audit coverage persists in the plans of some internal audit departments – particularly in the financial services industry (where some regulators are not quite as progressive when it comes to risk-based audit coverage). Cyclical audit coverage is well suited for “guarding,” but doesn’t do much for “enhancing” value. And, further, cyclical work doesn’t lend itself to being anticipatory of new risks on the horizon.
  • Your risk assessment is only focused one year ahead. Most internal audit departments today do undertake an annual risk assessment at least annually as part of their audit planning process. However, given the dynamic velocity of 21st century risks, annual assessments are no longer adequate. As I have commented in previous blogs, a continuous approach to risk assessment should be employed that looks to and beyond the horizon to identify emerging risks. There is no silver bullet for identifying emerging risks. Like all risk assessment, there is a degree of art in addition to science. However, if internal audit isn’t looking in the right direction, there is a greater likelihood of missing emerging risks. But just as storms in the Northern Hemisphere often emerge from the West, there are directions from which potential risks facing your company are likely to emerge. If you are only guarding against risks 12-months ahead, you will likely be surprised along the way.
  • The department is totally focused on assurance, and rarely offers advice to management on the effectiveness of risk management or controls. Finally, internal guard-it departments tend to heavily emphasize assurance as their primary means of communication. Assurance will always be an important means of serving the organization, but assurance primarily focuses on the past or present – rarely on the future. I believe internal audit doesn’t reach its full potential if it never offers foresight about risks and opportunities that lie ahead.
  • Internal Audit rarely has a “seat at the table” when strategic matters, and/or major change initiatives, are being discussed. The enhanced stature of internal audit has brought about significant changes in many organizations. One of those changes is the inclusion of the chief audit executives in executive or c-suite discussions on business or strategic discussions – having a seat at the table. Earning and sustaining a seat at the table doesn’t just happen. It is the product of strong relationship acumen and deep technical expertise. Others at the table gain the most value when the chief audit executive shares perspectives that will benefit the organization in the future – not when discussions focus on the past.

I recognize that a blog such as this one will elicit a variety of responses in the profession. The objective of my message is not to make anyone feel bad or defensive about their internal audit department. In the end, we must all answer to our stakeholders, and many of them are very comfortable with a more traditional approach to internal audit coverage. However, we should never be content to simply guard our organizations. We should tout our potential to stakeholders as an instrument not only to protect organizational value but to enhance it as well, and encourage CEOs and Audit Committees to tap that opportunity.

In my book Agents of Change: Internal Auditors in an Era of Disruption, I observed:

“Internal auditors used to be derisively referred to as “bean counters.” The classic assurance providers in the profession still count the beans. Trusted advisors, on the other hand, know how to grow, harvest, and take the beans to market. But it is the change agents in the profession who are bold and confident enough to advocate changing the crops from growing beans to growing corn.”

Share

Related posts

February 20, 2023

The Perils of Internal Audit as ’Corporate Police’


Read more
December 19, 2022

Fines Against Internal Auditors Raise Serious Questions


Read more
October 31, 2022

Internal Auditors: Put Away Your Radar Guns (and focus on traffic safety)


Read more

1 Comment

  1. Alaba Awolaja says:
    July 6, 2021 at 5:09 am

    Thanks so much Richard for this thoughtful piece.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What’s Trending

03-20-23

New Report Reveals Surprising Insights from Internal Audit Executives


03-13-23

New IIA Report Is a Timely Benchmarking Resource for Internal Auditors


03-02-23

6 Things Audit Committee Members Often Won’t Say to Internal Audit


Read More

Archive

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009

Contact Us

PO Box 1441
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32170

+1-407-463-9389
rchambers@richardchambers.com

About AuditBeacon.com

AuditBeacon.com is a resource center for internal auditors and risk professionals from around the world. In addition to more than 500 blogs authored by Richard Chambers, the site includes links to news and insights on internal audit and other information that illuminates the value of this important profession. AuditBeacon.com is provided as a service by Richard F. Chambers and Associates, LLC.

Copyright © 2023 Richard F. Chambers & Associates. All Rights Reserved.
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Audit Trail Academy
  • Advisory Services
  • Books