IIA-CIA-PART1 · Question #195
Management of an area under review is aggressive, upset, and questioning the knowledge and experience of the organization's internal auditors, as the audit results highlight critical findings. The…
The correct answer is C. Take an assertive approach and be persistent in attempting to convince the director. Option C is correct because internal auditors have a professional obligation under IIA Standards to communicate findings accurately and completely - an assertive, persistent approach preserves audit integrity when management pushes back aggressively. Yielding to pressure or…
Question
Management of an area under review is aggressive, upset, and questioning the knowledge and experience of the organization's internal auditors, as the audit results highlight critical findings. The relationship between the internal audit activity and management has continued to degenerate. as previous audit reports also showed a large number of issues. What would be the best strategy for working through the current audit results while also attempting to repair the relationship with management?
Options
- ATake an accommodating approach and change the overall rating of the audit report.
- BTake a compromising approach by modifying the tone of the report, while maintaining the critical
- CTake an assertive approach and be persistent in attempting to convince the director.
- DTake an assisting approach and offer to assist with the implementation of action plans.
How the community answered
(25 responses)- A4% (1)
- B8% (2)
- C72% (18)
- D16% (4)
Explanation
Option C is correct because internal auditors have a professional obligation under IIA Standards to communicate findings accurately and completely - an assertive, persistent approach preserves audit integrity when management pushes back aggressively. Yielding to pressure or softening legitimate critical findings would compromise the auditor's independence and objectivity, which are foundational to the internal audit function's value.
Why the distractors fail:
- A (Accommodating) is the most dangerous choice - changing an overall rating to appease management is a direct violation of auditor independence and would render the report misleading.
- B (Compromising) is similarly problematic; modifying tone to reduce friction can blur the severity of findings and mislead stakeholders who rely on accurate, unvarnished reports.
- D (Assisting) may seem collaborative, but offering to help implement action plans crosses the line into management's operational responsibility, impairing the auditor's future objectivity and independence over that area.
Memory tip: Think of internal auditors as "audit doctors" - a doctor who softens a serious diagnosis to avoid upsetting a patient is failing their duty. Assertiveness = professional courage, which is explicitly required by the IIA's Code of Ethics. When management gets hostile, the answer is almost always: hold the line, document everything, escalate if needed.
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.