logo-newlogo-newlogo-newlogo-new
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Audit Trail Academy
  • Advisory Services
  • Books
✕
  • Home
  • Chambers on Internal Audit
  • Corporate Governance
  • FTX’s Lack of Governance and Internal Auditors Should Have Been Red Flags

FTX’s Lack of Governance and Internal Auditors Should Have Been Red Flags

Call For Nominations – 4th Annual Internal Audit Beacon Awards
November 15, 2022
New Report: 2023 Will Likely Present More Challenges Than Internal Auditors Think
December 1, 2022
November 21, 2022

Over the years, I have written several blogs and articles focused on corporate culture. The recent collapse of FTX reminds us once again how toxic culture and ineffective corporate governance can destroy a company. The words of the newly appointed CEO of FTX, from the company’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy declaration, are a searing indictment:

“Never in my career have I seen such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy financial information as occurred here. From compromised systems integrity and faulty regulatory oversight abroad, to the concentration of control in the hands of a very small group of inexperienced, unsophisticated and potentially compromised individuals, this situation is unprecedented.”

It would be easy to refer to FTX as a “train wreck,” but even a train wreck starts out with a functioning engine. FTX appears to have never embraced governance or controls. For example, “employees of the FTX Group submitted
payment requests through an on-line ‘chat’ platform where a disparate group of supervisors approved disbursements by responding with personalized emojis.”
Recent media reports have indicated that more than 1 million creditors and investors may stand to lose money in the wake of the FTX collapse.

My first instinct in the wake of the FTX news was to write a blog about the lessons learned from the collapse. But the fact is, there are very few new lessons from FTX – there are only reminders. We are once again reminded that “fools and their money soon part,” Peter Drucker was right (“culture eats strategy for breakfast”), and when there is no internal audit function, investors should run.

My last point may seem a bit trivial in the face of such an enormous calamity. My point is not that an internal audit function at FTX would have prevented the outcome. Rather, it was the absence of internal audit – and, more importantly, a legitimate board of directors – that signaled a giant red flag. Investors enamored with potentially huge returns turned a blind eye to a frat-party culture that screamed “run as fast as you can!”

Anyone who follows me knows I am an unwavering advocate for internal audit to play a key role in assessing and providing assurance around an organization’s culture. I have found that an undeniable link exists between an organization’s culture and whether the company has an internal audit function (and how the function is treated). Simply, healthy cultures value oversight to ensure accountability.

There were far too many signals that the FTX culture was toxic. Frankly, it was an easy target to identify. However, there are a great many companies whose cultures offer no red flags to unsuspecting investors yet are big risks for investment. Of course, the complete lack of internal audit should speak volumes.

A few years ago, I wrote about the way companies treat their internal audit functions and how that can offer important clues about their culture.  

Let’s examine what most would consider healthy or poor relationships between management and internal audit and what it says about the organizations in which they coexist.

Ideally, internal audit should operate in an atmosphere that allows it to function independently. It should have the resources to do its job well. It should have separate administrative and functional reporting lines to the CEO and board or audit committee, respectively. It should have a clear and positive relationship with management that allows it to communicate openly and confidently without fear of repercussions, and it should enjoy a similar relationship with its audit committee and/or board.

This type of culture suggests management has the confidence to have its actions and decisions routinely undergo scrutiny from an informed and independent perspective. It reflects a management that understands its role and that of the board and audit committee, and one that is eager to identify risks and control weaknesses and improve on those areas. It reveals a commitment to transparency from confident leadership that does not fear that its actions fall outside the lines of established risks appetites, business strategies, or ethics.

Most importantly, it sets a tone at the top that signals unequivocally that doing things right are hallmarks of its culture.

Conversely, a poor relationship between management and internal audit is defined by efforts to undermine internal audit’s ability to do its job. This signals leadership that fears scrutiny and will take steps to obstruct or avoid feedback from an independent internal audit function.

Telltale signs include:

  • Attitude toward internal audit: Management’s response to internal audit’s inquiries is to circle the wagons and limit access to information.
  • Carousel of chief audit executives: Management cycles through a number of CAEs, seeking one it can most easily control or manipulate.
  • Pressure to change or hide findings: Management makes clear it doesn’t want to hear the truth.
  • Redirecting or misdirecting internal audit: Management manipulates the choice of audits based on an agenda that doesn’t take into account the organization’s risk.
  • Manipulating internal audit’s budget: Management limits resources in staff, access to expertise (co-sourcing), or travel in order to limit internal audit’s ability to do its job.
  • Limiting internal audit’s access to the board or audit committee: Management wants to control the message from internal audit to the board.

Each action reflects a tone at the top of avoiding accountability and transparency. That does not mean an organization is operating unethically or illegally, but it does strongly suggest a fundamental disregard or dangerous misunderstanding of good governance. And it points to an imperative that the organization has work to do on its culture.

If your organization exhibits any of those red flags, internal audit should take the initiative and address them with management and the board sooner than later. 

It is important to remember that the relationship between management and internal audit is a two-way street. Disagreement or even occasional tension between the two does not necessarily mean there is a serious problem with the organization’s culture. One must consider that internal audit itself may have a culture that fosters mistrust and friction.

I suspect much more will be learned about the FTX debacle. It is a scandal that already rivals some of the iconic corporate collapses of the 21st century. But I have heard enough to be reminded that culture is often the culprit in these senseless failures. Investors should always be attuned to culture when sizing up companies. My advice remains: If there is no formal board or internal audit – look elsewhere.

As always, I welcome your comments. 

Share

Related posts

March 2, 2022

New IIA-UK Report Takes a Fresh Look at Auditing Culture


Read more

Two men outdoors in tug of war

October 11, 2021

One Company – Two Chief Audit Executives: Twice as Effective or Double Trouble?


Read more
May 31, 2021

5 Reasons People Stay in Toxic Cultures


Read more

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