【導讀】比如說，視遵照標準的程度為影響內部審計表現(xiàn)的其中因素之一。層和外部審計員的認知力。這項研究證明了衡量所提供服務的價值的艱難性就是做評。收益性，費用標準以及資源利用率都被確認為服務價值的衡量標準。在這項研究里，它強調了確保內部審計工作應遵從SPPIA的必要性。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)有四個能讓內部審計部門發(fā)展從而提高內。該承認內部審計職能對于企業(yè)來說是一種具有增值性的職能。大量的研究都特別專注于內部審計部門對于SPPIA遵從性的研究。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)對這11個國家的國際會計師協(xié)會成員的調。查中，有82%的是遵循SPPIA的。這個蠻高的百分比率促使學者們建議SPPIA提供內。許多的研究已經關注涉及到獨立性的SPPIA標準。Plumlee發(fā)現(xiàn)這樣參與設計會產生偏見最終會影響到。內部審計職能與公司管理層兩者之間的關系通常會成為決定內部審計。會計師協(xié)會成員的內部審計人員是不大可能屈服于這種壓迫下的。沒有提供不設置內部審計部門的原因。有10家公司曾經設立過內部審計部門但由于

　　

【正文】 t defining the purpose, authority and responsibility of the department. In nearly all instances where there was such a document the terms of reference of the internal audit department had been agreed by senior management (93%), the document identified the role of the internal audit department in the organization, and its rights of access to individuals, records and assets (97%), and the document set out the scope of internal auditing (90%). Respondents were asked to assess the extent to which the relevant document was consistent with the specific requirements of SPPIA. In those departments where such a document existed 27 (45%) claimed full pliance with SPPIA, 23 (38%) considered their document to be partially consistent with SPPIA. In more than onethird of the departments surveyed either no such document existed (n=18, 23%) or the respondent was not aware whether or not the document plied with SPPIA (n=10, 13%). SPPIA suggests that independence is enhanced when the organization’s board of directors concurs with the appointment or removal of the director of the internal audit department, and that the director of the internal audit department is responsible to an individual of suitable seniority within the organization. It is noticeable that in 47 panies (60%) their responsibilities with regard to appointment, removal and the receipt of reports lay with nonsenior management, normally a general manager. SPPIA remends that the director of the internal audit department should have direct munication with the board of directors to ensure that the department is independent, and provides a means for the director of internal auditing and the board of directors to keep each other informed on issues of mutual interest. The interviews with directors of internal audit departments showed that departments tended to report to general managers rather than the board of directors. Further evidence of the lack of access to the board of directors was provided by the questionnaire responses showing that in almost half the panies, members of the internal audit department have never attended board meetings and in only two panies did attendance take place regularly. Unrestricted access to documentation and unfettered powers of enquiry are important aspects of the independence and effectiveness of internal audit. The questionnaire responses revealed that 34 (44%) internal audit directors considered that they did not have full access to all necessary information. Furthermore, a significant minority (n=11, 14%) did not believe they were free, in all instances, to report faults, frauds, wrongdoing or mistakes. A slightly higher number (n=17, 22%) considered that the internal audit function did not always receive consistent support from senior management. SPPIA identifies that involvement in the design, installation and operating of systems is likely to impair internal auditor objectivity. Respondents were asked how often management requested the assistance of the internal audit department in the performance of nonaudit duties. In 37 internal audit departments (47%) surveyed such requests were made sometimes, often or always, and only 27 (35%) departments never participated in these nonaudit activities. The interviews revealed that in some organizations internal audit staff was used regularly to cover for staff shortages in other departments.