Resolution of the Internal Audit-Based Role Conflicts in Risk Management: Evidence from Signaling Game Analysis

Halis Kiral () and Hakan Karabacak ()
Additional contact information
Halis Kiral: Social Sciences University of Ankara
Hakan Karabacak: Social Sciences University of Ankara

Group Decision and Negotiation, 2020, vol. 29, issue 5, No 2, 823-841

Abstract: Abstract This study analyzes the inherent role conflicts of internal audit in risk management and clarifies the conditions for the resolution of them using a signaling game model. In the model, we determined five perfect Bayesian Nash equilibriums. The analysis emphasizes the compatibility between the assurance or consulting roles of internal audit and service demand of management. Two equilibriums come to the fore in this respect, and both of them set a game-theoretic ground for the theoretical arguments. Firstly in the face of uncertainty about the risk maturity level of the organization, internal auditors should prefer assurance service in enterprise-wide risk management. The analysis of the equilibriums supports the idea that the assurance role being the core task of internal audit continues to be the key component of the audit profession. Secondly, in “risk-mature” organizations, it is possible to create more value by focusing on the assurance role, whereas for the early stages of risk management, focusing on the consulting role enables one to add more value. The predictions of equilibrium results are in line with this theoretical argument. Furthermore, the equilibrium results imply that the compatibility predicted by the equilibriums features the necessity of proper dialogue mechanisms and especially an effective negotiation process between the internal audit and management. The dialogue and negotiation competency of the relevant parties will enable them to find mutually optimal strategies in accordance with the risk maturity level and ultimately to contribute to the resolution of inherent role conflicts.

Keywords: Risk management; Internal audit; Role conflicts; Assurance; Consulting; Signaling game (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-020-09679-x Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:grdene:v:29:y:2020:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-020-09679-x

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/10726/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10726-020-09679-x

Access Statistics for this article

Group Decision and Negotiation is currently edited by Gregory E. Kersten

More articles in Group Decision and Negotiation from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().