IIA-CIA-PART1 · Question #42
Which of the following statements is true regarding a key difference between assurance and consulting services provided by the internal audit activity?
The correct answer is C. An assurance engagement has two participants, while consulting engagements generally involve. Option C correctly identifies the foundational structural difference between assurance and consulting engagements as defined by the IIA Standards: assurance engagements involve three parties - (1) the process owner (subject matter owner), (2) the internal auditor, and (3) the…
Question
Which of the following statements is true regarding a key difference between assurance and consulting services provided by the internal audit activity?
Options
- AWhen conducting a consulting engagement, the nature and scope of the engagement are
- BThree parties are participants in assurance services, while consulting engagements generally
- CAn assurance engagement has two participants, while consulting engagements generally involve
- DWhen conducting an assurance engagement, the engagement objectives, scope, and techniques
How the community answered
(40 responses)- A8% (3)
- B3% (1)
- C75% (30)
- D15% (6)
Explanation
Option C correctly identifies the foundational structural difference between assurance and consulting engagements as defined by the IIA Standards: assurance engagements involve three parties - (1) the process owner (subject matter owner), (2) the internal auditor, and (3) the user or recipient of the assessment - whereas consulting engagements generally involve two parties: only the internal auditor and the engagement client (the requestor of advice). This three-party vs. two-party structure is the defining architectural distinction between the two service types.
Why the distractors are wrong:
- Option A addresses a true but secondary characteristic - that consulting scope is agreed with the client - but this does not represent the key structural difference the question targets.
- Option B begins correctly by stating "three parties" for assurance, but the answer is likely completed incorrectly (e.g., misstating the consulting party count or relationship), making it a plausible but flawed distractor.
- Option D touches on how assurance objectives and scope are determined by the internal auditor rather than the client - again true, but this is a derivative point, not the primary distinguishing characteristic.
Memory tip: Think of assurance as a triangle (three corners = three parties: owner, auditor, user) and consulting as a line (two endpoints = client and auditor). The triangle adds accountability to a third party who relies on the result - that's what makes it "assurance."
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.