- the second section concerns the critical aspects of some details of the factors listed in the first part, underlying the most important aspects which can limit the effectiveness of controls;
- the final section deals with the relevance of some improving actions, relative to the factors mentioned in the first section.
The different categories of auditors were required to make reference to their personal experience, generally speaking and not in the specific sectors in which they
operate, in order to avoid “defensive” behaviour; the questionnaires were anonymous.
Before sending the questionnaire, some external professionals were interviewed in order to verify if the questions they contained could be considered clear.
Fig. 2 Literature review, research questions and scientific hypotheses
The questions expressed by the survey require answers within a“1-6 scale”where “1” stands for “no problem emergence/no intervention required” and “6” stands for “problem identified/intervention required”
Questions are not open-ended but a few of the interviewees added some additional thoughts regarding the issues analysed to the questionnaire. The authors took into consideration these further comments in a second phase where they analysed the meaning of the answers more deeply.
The results of the questionnaires were processed using statistical techniques. In particular the results were converted into average data.
Before sending the questionnaire, the authors interviewed 4 partners of auditing companies, 2 statutory auditors of listed Italian companies and 2 Internal Auditors of listed Italian companies in order to check whether the questions were easy enough to understand.
Moreover, the authors contacted a Group of Experts to focus on providing empirical elements to reason on along the tests. Ten participants shared their experience on auditing issues.7
The results of this brainstorming session provided the authors with interesting thoughts that completed the existing literature with new ideas and found new issues to be discussed during the survey interviews. The questionnaire was sent following the Group of Expert meetings.
After collecting all the questionnaires and a limited number of conference calls, email interviews were carried out by the authors with statutory auditors, auditors and Internal Auditors. In this way the authors were able to share the results of the questionnaire with experts.
The authors believe that the 3 auditing roles elected as a sample for the industry gave a realist view on the current Italian situation.
In order to get a better response rate, the authors sent the survey twice. After the first mailing the authors called the recipients and then mailed the survey a second time if necessary. This procedure did not produce a difference in the response percentage but it was useful to get further comments on the issues to be discussed during this survey.
The main goal of this survey was to test the assumptions described in Sect. 4.1, assumptions realised on the basis of the mentioned literature and focused on three main questions as explained in Sect. 3:
- What are the factors that can represent major risks in terms of control failures, according to the most important auditors (Internal and External Auditors, Statutory Auditors)? As shown in Fig. 2, this first research question was associated to H1 and H3. The existence of different auditing bodies and the uncertainty of SA roles were identified as major issues explaining IC failures.
- What are the possible actions aimed at improving the Italian situation in terms of control activities, on the basis of the perception of the most important auditors? The presence of independent IA and EA were identified as determinant factors in order to improve IC systems and activities. This is why the second research questions was linked to H2 and H4. 企业内部控制制度英文文献和翻译(8):http://www.751com.cn/fanyi/lunwen_239.html