Global study shows Australia as a leader in internal audit

go here A recent survey of nearly 15,000 auditors across 166 countries has revealed Australia as leading from the front in internal audit.

buy Lyrica in uk Australian chief audit executives (CAEs) are more consultative than their global counterparts in developing internal audit plans that are aligned to the strategic plan of the organisation. They will soon face a raft of emerging challenges, however, as a result of generational and other staffing changes.

e possibile guadagnare con le opzioni binarie The Institute of Internal Auditors’ Common Body of Knowledge (CBOK) study, Great ways to motivate your staff: shaping an audit team that adds value and inspires business improvement, surveyed 14,518 respondents in 166 countries, including Australia. The term ‘chief audit executive’ relates to the generic term used in the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing to refer to the head of internal audit in an organisation.

go che cosa sono le azioni binarie Strategic alignment of audit activities

optionbin The study shows 57 per cent of CAEs across the world report that their internal audit functions are fully or almost fully aligned with the strategic plan of their organisation. In Australia, CAEs report 62 per cent of their audit functions are fully or almost fully aligned, with a further 38 per cent somewhat aligned.

Consideration of the organisation’s strategies and business objectives is essential if internal audit functions are to be positioned so as to help their organisation accomplish its objectives. A crucial first step is to undertake an analysis of the organisation’s strategy or business objectives in developing the internal audit plan: 79 per cent of CAE respondents do this in Australia, compared to 64 per cent globally.

CAEs typically use a range of consultation, analysis and research avenues to develop their internal audit plans. The study shows that 85 per cent of CAEs globally use a risk-based methodology, with requests from the audit committee used by 56 per cent of global respondents. In Australia, these figures are very reassuring: 100 per cent of CAE respondents use a risk-based methodology; and 87 per cent use input from their audit committees. Australia is similarly well-placed with most other planning
input avenues.

Both in Australia and across the world, planning could be enhanced by boosting the external research of industry trends, emerging risk issues and other hot topics, with the aim of incorporating suitable topics into the internal audit plan. Planning also needs to take into account the effectiveness of other assurance activities within the organisation.

Global research might well promote the inclusion of fresh topics into audit plans, such as:

  • corporate culture, which is a pivotal foundation for effective risk management
  • cybercrime, which has been suffered by 30 per cent of organisations globally
  • the importance of an overall compliance framework, rather than tackling micro-level ‘bits and pieces’ of compliance
  • the availability and e ectiveness of all primary frameworks (eg governance, conflicts of interest, other). Measuring internal audit performance

CAEs in Australia have a more refi ned approach to measuring internal audit performance. The two most common measures in Australia are the percentage of the audit plan that is complete at 72 per cent (66 per cent globally); and client satisfaction goals at 61 per cent (38 per cent globally).

Using balanced scorecard reporting for internal audit has risen globally from 4 per cent in 2010 to 26 per cent in 2015. This is expected to further increase over the next few years. For optimal cascading of performance measures, the personal performance objectives of individual auditors need to be aligned to the high-level KPIs used in balanced scorecards. The motivation of internal auditors can be influenced by a wide range of factors, including life satisfaction, generational differences and unique gender needs. Generational change

A significant challenge for CAEs over the next five years is the anticipated retirement of baby boomers (who are currently aged 51 to 69) and the resulting loss of their well-tuned communication skills and significant workplace experience. In all, 31 per cent of baby boomers working in internal auditing roles in Australia expect to retire in the next five years, compared to 24 per cent globally.

Organisations need to leverage in a creative fashion the passion, skills, experience and war stories from the baby boomers to help the generational transition. In Australia, 70 per cent of baby boomers employed in internal audit roles have more than 15 years of professional internal audit experience; this is significantly higher than their global counterparts (42 per cent). Experienced internal auditors have a valuable helicopter view of governance, risk and compliance of organisations, which can assist their organisations in achieving business objectives and improving operations.

The study shows that millennials (those aged 19 to 34) currently hold nearly half of all internal audit staff roles and a small proportion of CAE roles. The rate of retention between millennials and generation X is remarkably similar (77 to 78 per cent) as a global average. In Australia, however, just 50 per cent of millennials expect to stay in the profession (76 per cent of generation X). As generational change takes
effect, millennials will be given opportunities to move into management positions. Many CAEs are now investing in the leadership development and training of their younger internal auditors.

Under the watchful eye of audit committees, CAEs need to establish a workforce plan and complementary talent management strategy to promote innovation and align with stakeholder needs, diversity ideals, audit plans, a competency gap analysis and succession planning.\'s-10-years-younger Gender gap is closing

The study shows that males still continue to hold the highest proportion of leadership roles globally, representing 69 per cent of CAEs, and 67 per cent of directors or senior manager roles.

Globally, women represented 38 per cent of the internal audit workforce in 2015, up from 36 per cent in 2010.

The gender gap has closed in some countries, including China, Taiwan and Hong Kong reporting an impressive 53 per cent female participation, and North America 50 per cent. In East Asia and the Pacific region, including Australia, women represent 43 per cent of all internal auditing roles (up from 32 per cent in 2010).

With more women increasingly joining the profession, their priorities also need to be considered in workforce planning, including work/life balance, workplace stability, flexible working arrangements and working from home.

Stakeholder expectations for internal audit will continue to evolve. Effective CAEs maximise the productivity and contribution of their internal audit cohort, and they position their teams to add value and inspire business improvement. Adding value and inspiring business improvement

The research publication Great ways to motivate your staff: shaping an audit team that adds value and inspires business improvement is available free of charge from The publication outlines five key strategies:

  • Goal-setting – to help the organisation meet its objectives
  • Retaining talent – to build an effective internal audit team
  • Equipping employees – to deliver value
  • Assessing performance – to drive optimal contribution
  • Treating success – to boost internal audit productivity.

One thought on “Global study shows Australia as a leader in internal audit

  • July 30, 2016 at 9:47 am

    Although the article also attempts to articulate team planning dynamics holistically; the modern trend (proven in academia and practiced in high performing global organisations) is actually the need to understanding and applying:
    * Human Capital theory
    * An understanding in managing culture and diversity across human capital demographics,
    * Strategic human resource development and individualistic career concepts/goals in order to response to the challenges in the ever ‘war for talent’,
    * Building on reward management (intrinsic/extrinsic reward settings),
    * Developing your human capital and identifying how best this human capital be retained/retrained,
    * Not just an understanding corporate culture but also implementing integrity and ethical corporate behaviour into employee practice to assist with human capital development,
    * Tacit transfer practices and systems to capture ‘knowledge transfer’ e.g. key information not leave with the employee on they leaving the organisation,
    * Innovative strategies to clearly identifying and responding to the challenges and competing perspectives and interests around human capital (e.g. a ‘Discussion Paper’ by the Manager for Leadership Cohorts to consider), and
    * Understanding the Gender Gap ‘Glass Ceiling’ and developing human capital strategies to break this ceiling in workforce team planning.

    The Article portrays baby boomers are leaving the workforce and that succession planning is a component in managing exits. However, research and trends suggest that more mature/older workers are actually remaining in the workforce. Hence, it should be a role for managers and strategic leaders to understanding one must not just rely on ‘succession planning’ but also accepting the challenge to harness, retain and/or hire mature/older workers (45 years or more) and applying local employment strategies (e.g. Mentor roles, part-time arrangements, etc.) to encourage this employee demographic remain interested in working longer. In this managers/leaders must see over the horizon and not just consider succession planning and ‘younger’ employees as a solution…

    Finally, if any Committee were to be an oversight of a team function, it should be a priority that these Committee Members have established tertiary (ideally Post Graduate AQF Level8) credentials and importantly in important fields such as ‘organisational psychology’ (which is what Committees lack whilst thinking they understand human capital dynamics). In other words… to have Accounting/Auditor/IT bean counters oversighting human resource dynamics (when they have not studied advanced level AQF8 type concepts in human capital psychology) is like an untrained lifeguard allowing swimmers to be outside the flags…

    Overall, and taking off my ‘Accounting’ hat, my (MBA Deans Medal thinking) thoughts are that 5 key strategies to improve human capital management linked to operational efficiency and value outcomes could be:

    1. Strategically applying Human Capital theory (in line with any Enterprise Agreement type settings).

    2. Locally apply Reward Management with individual goals linked to these rewards and recognition.

    3. Strategically looking at the ‘big picture’ with what you have versus what you wish to FYE accomplish and not be afraid to report (e.g. Discussion Papers) for Leaders to consider in improving team efficiency, performance, understanding digital IT solutions against corporate journey outcomes.

    4.Thinking outside the square and not just focus on ‘succession planning’ but harnessing what you have and seeing mature/older workers as an important and strategic facet in organisation environments, and

    5. Committee Members (if required) having suitable tertiary qualifications that include backgrounds in organisational psychology/human resource specialisations. This helps to identify you not only have the right staff to accomplish the goals but the right leaders to implement those goals… and if this means reporting to that Committee they don’t have suitable qualifications to understanding human capital management then don’t be afraid to say it… the truth hurts but some people need to really know if they are the best qualified person for that role.

    IPA Members, I am available via LinkedIn should you wish network and hear more about my interests in human capital development.

Leave a Reply

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