logo-newlogo-newlogo-newlogo-new
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Audit Trail Academy
  • Advisory Services
  • Books
✕
  • Home
  • Chambers on Internal Audit
  • Uncategorized
  • The Rotational CAE Model: Is it Good for Internal Auditing?

The Rotational CAE Model: Is it Good for Internal Auditing?

Chief Audit Executives beware…..we’re entering one of those eras again!
February 10, 2009
Are There Lessons for Internal Auditing in All of This?
February 25, 2009
February 17, 2009

There was a time when a career goal for many internal audit professionals was to rise through the corporate internal audit ranks to become their company’s General Auditor – what is known as today’s Chief Audit Executive (CAE).  My first CAE had been an internal audit professional almost 20 years when I joined the organization.  He was still the CAE 13 years later when I took his place (having left and returned to the department twice).

Today’s CAE, however, is quite a different executive than in the past.  In the modern corporate model, the CAE position is frequently a rotational assignment that is filled for 3-5 year tenures by upwardly mobile executives out of the CFO organization.  In fact, recent studies have indicated that as many of 40 percent of Fortune 500 CAE positions are now considered rotational.  The question is no longer whether this model is widely practiced.  The question is now: Is this good for internal audit?

Why the rotational model is good for internal audit:  I have had the opportunity to work closely in recent years with scores of CAEs in Fortune 500 companies.  Many of them were career financial executives who were in a rotational assignment as a CAE.  In most cases, they brought a tremendous level of energy and enthusiasm to the role.  Having not spent their careers in internal auditing, they also brought a fresh and innovative perspective to such fundamental tasks as risk assessment and audit planning.  Some of them became leaders in the internal audit profession and even took and passed the Certified Internal Auditor (CIA) exam.  Because they transitioned into internal audit from “the business,” they had a strong appreciation for key risks and opportunities facing the enterprise, as well as strong relationships with other key executives in the company.  These relationships often help create an environment where management is open and receptive to internal audit findings and recommendations.  In short, there are many benefits that have accrued to the profession in general – and corporate audit functions in particular – by virtue of the proliferating rotational CAE model.

Why the rotational model is bad for internal audit:  Despite the many positive aspects of the rotational model, there are also clear drawbacks.  The most obvious drawback relates to the actual or perceived objectivity of CAEs who are slated to only spend a short tenure in an internal audit leadership role.  As mentioned above, these executives are often from the CFO area of the organization – with a clear expectation of returning there after serving as the CAE.  Without exception, each of the CAEs with whom I have had the opportunity to work has had an independent mindset.  In addition, their CFOs have made it clear that they respected the independence of internal auditing.  Regardless of the realities, however, the perception can still present a problem.  I have had many conversations with executives in companies where the CAE is actually a career CFO organization professional, and their colleagues believe their objectivity is impaired when auditing CFO functions or programs.  If this belief is widely held, it can erode the stature of the CAE and the entire internal audit function. 

Another potential drawback to the rotational model occurs when it’s intentionally designed to be brief (I.e. less than three years).  In such instances, it is sometimes difficult for the CAE to achieve the level of effectiveness that often comes with tenure in a senior executive position.  In addition, if the entire internal audit department is rotational (including the CAE), there is a significant challenge in accumulating the institutional knowledge of the company’s risk and controls that an effective internal audit function needs.

Safeguards for rotational CAE models:  Whether the rotational model is good or bad for internal auditing is not black and white.  Regardless of one’s views on the subject, it is a practice that appears to be here to stay.  In order to minimize the risks associated with such a model, I would offer five safeguards:

  1. The Audit Committee should understand the advantages, disadvantages and risks of such a model, and be engaged in the selection and evaluation of the CAE.
  2. The Audit Committee should pay particular attention to the risk assessment results and audit coverage of the area from which the individual is drawn (and would be expected to return). 
  3. If possible, the CAE should have an administrative reporting relationship outside of the area from which he or she is drawn (and expects to return).  For example, a CAE from the CFO organization could report administratively to the CEO or General Council.
  4. The terms of the rotation should preclude the individual from returning to the same functional area from which they were drawn.
  5. The rotation should be at least a five-year assignment.  The longer the individual is expected to serve as the CAE, the lower the perceived risk of objectivity impairment.
Share

Related posts

March 13, 2023

New IIA Report Is a Timely Benchmarking Resource for Internal Auditors


Read more
May 16, 2022

THE STAGGERING TOLL OF COVID RELIEF FRAUD: WHERE WERE THE THREE LINES?


Read more
February 3, 2022

To Live a Life in Color, You May Have to Change Channels


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