Internal audit quality: a polysemous notion?

Melanie Roussy and Marion Brivot

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2016, vol. 29, issue 5, 714-738

Abstract: Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to characterize how those who perform (internal auditors), mandate (audit committee (AC) members), use (AC members and external auditors) and normalize (the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA)) internal audit work, respectively make sense of the notion of “internal audit quality” (IAQ). Design/methodology/approach - – This study is predicated on the meta-analysis of extant literature on IAQ, 56 interviews with internal auditors and AC members of public or para-public sector organizations in Canada, and archival documents published by the IIA, analyzed in the light of framing theory. Findings - – Four interpretative schemes (or frames) emerge from the analysis, called “manager,” “éminence grise,” “professional” and “watchdog.” They respectively correspond to internal auditors’, AC members’, the IIA’s and external auditors’ viewpoints and suggest radically different perspectives on how IAQ should be defined and controlled (via input, throughput, output or professional controls). Research limitations/implications - – Empirically, the authors focus on rare research data. Theoretically, the authors delineate four previously undocumented competing frames of IAQ. Practical implications - – Practically, the various governance actors involved in assessing IAQ can learn from the study that they should confront their views to better coordinate their quality control efforts. Originality/value - – Highlighting the contrast between these frames is important because, so far, extant literature has predominantly focussed on only one perspective on IAQ, that of external auditors. The authors suggest that IAQ is more polysemous and complex than previously acknowledged, which justifies the qualitative and interpretive approach.

Keywords: Internal audit quality; Public sector; Framing theory; Quality controls (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:aaajpp:v:29:y:2016:i:5:p:714-738

DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-10-2014-1843

Access Statistics for this article

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal is currently edited by Prof James Guthrie and Prof Lee Parker

More articles in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().