内部审计 外文文献翻译

文献信息：文献标题：A Theoretical Discussion of Internal Audit Effectiveness in Kuwaiti Industrial SMEs（科威特工业中小企业内部审计有效性的理论探讨）国外作者：Awn Metlib AL-SHBAIL，Turki A.A.TURKI文献出处：《International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences》, 2017,1(7):107-116字数统计：英文2221单词，12805字符；中文4184汉字外文文献：A Theoretical Discussion of Internal Audit Effectiveness inKuwaiti Industrial SMEsAbstract This paper aims to scrutinise the association between the internal audit effectiveness and the four factors associated with International Standards for Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (ISPPIA): independence of internal auditors, scope of internal auditors, management support, and audited cooperation. The relationship between these factors and Satisfaction of internal auditors is also examined. Further, the moderating effect on the relationship between these factors (if present) and the effectiveness of IA among industrial SMEs in Kuwait are investigated through satisfaction of internal auditors. By ascertaining the effectiveness of IA at the industrial firms via theories as well as variables, this paper broadens the available literature on the effectiveness of IA.Key words：Internal audit effectiveness, satisfaction of internal auditors, Kuwaiti Industrial SMEs1.IntroductionWithin the past few decades, internal audit departments have significantly contributed to organizational structure through value added services and thus, it hasbecome crucial part therein (Al- Twaijry et al., 2003; Arena and Azzone, 2009; Coram et al., 2008). Moreover, internal auditing has significantly increased in importance in the previous years, particularly in its consulting role inside the firm’s risk management. Owing to the widespread accounting scandals, and also the bankruptcy of firms, the internal audit (IA) function has been the focus of researchers and practitioners alike as a significant contributor of organizational effectiveness. More specifically, Abu-Azza (2012) contended that IA will contribute firm value through the provision of field services including operational audits and consulting management on various issues. Following the global financial crisis in 2008-2009, IA has transformed into a significant entity used to protect the rate of return on capital and to prevent wasted or devalued capital (Yee et al., 2008). Nevertheless, some studies in literature indicated that the effectiveness of IA function may not always be consistent (Abuazza et al., 2015). This is particularly true in developing countries, like Kuwait where firms may not be aware how much the IA concepts and practices are worth as acknowledged in the West.Moreover, Kuwaiti listed firms operate in an environment characterized with voluntary governance as Kuwait is considered to be among the Middle Easter nations that have not established a corporate governance code (Koldertsova, 2011). Moreover, such firms display high ownership concentration that may balance the weaker legal protection provided (Abu-Azza, 2012). Contrary to majority of developed nations, the Kuwait government mandates the appointment of a least two distinct auditors in firms, that are known as joint auditors or audit pairs. Despite the increasing importance of the IA function in organizations, the available literature in the domain has largely concentrated on external audit; other related authors indicated that IA function may not demonstrate consistent effectiveness (Al-Twaijry et al., 2003; Mihret et al., 2010; Mihret and Yismaw, 2007). More importantly, although some scholars examined IA effectiveness, as yet, there is no accepted universal guide to conduct such measurement (Arena and Azzone, 2009). Additionally, the literature reveals that no acknowledged approaches have been forwarded for the assessment of IA (Mihret et al., 2010) and as such, various approaches have been used in prior investigations of IAeffectiveness.2.Internal Audit in Kuwaiti Industrial SMEsSMEs are an integral part of numerous global economies particularly with respect to employment and their contribution to GDP. They have also played a significant role especially within certain GCC States including the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In UAE SMEs contribute to 30% of the overall GDP and 86% of the country’s employment. Comparably, in Saudi Arabia, SMEs make up 28% of GDP. On the other hand, Kuwait was late to appreciate the key role that can be played by SMEs enterprises in the economy. The private sector and SME contributions to employment lack lustre, and the government currently employs about 85% of Kuwait’s workforce (Alhabashi, 2015). However, Rampurwala and Marafi (2011), and Al Mutairi and Fayez (2015) suggested that, in Kuwait, local policies are fragmented and although several organizations see the benefit of SMEs in various sectors such as industrial, they are still in their beginning stages. This means that the launch of new industrial SMEs is likely to be weak, thus reducing their opportunity to contribute to the economy. In addition, Datta (2009) and Alhabashi (2015), point out that formal banks are usually loathed to lend to industrial SMEs because they suffer from failure to authenticate their information, such as accounting records and financial statements that reflect the efficiency and the capability of the project. Within the context of business market of Kuwait, 99% of firms consists of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) operating in the national economy institutions. Based on the distribution of SMEs in different sectors of Kuwait’s economic sectors, 11.7% of such firms operate in the industrial sector, 4% in the agricultural sector, 51% in the trade sector, 16% in the service sector, 0.3% in the mining sector, and the remaining 17% in other community services and social services sector.In Kuwait, industrial SMEs Law necessitates that the Kuwait Stock Exchange (KSE) listed companies to appoint two separate auditors to audit accounts. Additionally, this study shows the similarities and differences between audit services in the market in Kuwait and in other countries to enhance the knowledge of worldeconomy that is increasingly interdependent with accounting and auditing. Besides that, knowledge of the economies of auditing could also be increased (Shammari et al., 2008).3.Theoretical PerspectivesIn the context of IA research, the use of neoclassical economic theories like the agency theory (Adams, 1994) as well as the transaction cost theory (Spraakman, 1997) are not sufficient because they posit a developed a market economy environment characterized as having considerable transaction volume according to the economic development level throughout countries (Reed, 2002). Therefore, this confines the capacity of the theories to explain IA in extensive settings.Criticism of the above theories also stems from the institutional theories maintaining that individual behavior whether as product consumer or producer, cannot be delineated from the social context wherein the behavior occurs (Hula, 1984). Barley and Tolbert (1997) explained that the institutional theory acknowledges the significant value of cultural and social determinants as a significant impact upon the decision making (cited in Mihret et al. (2010)).Based on this premise, Mihret et al. (2010) made use of the institutional theory proposed by Dimaggio and Powell (1983), particularly circuit of industrial capital. Institutional theories primarily function as the base for examining organizational phenomenon integrated in extensive social, political and economic environments (Mihret et al., 2010). More importantly, they are capable of providing an insight into the IA practices as one element of organizational systems and shed light on the relationship between IA and the attainment of the objectives of the firms (Mihret et al., 2010).4.Research Model and HypothesesKing et al. (1994) illustrated a model to be an approximation, or a straightforward replica of the actual feature and in the current study. The primary objective is to investigate the present perceptions of IA directors, administrativeaffairs managers, financial affairs managers, CEOs and internal auditors concerning IA effectiveness through the determination of factors impacting the same. Additionally, several studies that examined this issue have employed various measures (Abu-Azza, 2012; Mihret et al., 2010; Mihret and Yismaw, 2007) but very few of them, as yet, has investigated the effect of internal auditors’ pay satisfaction on the effectiveness of IA. Five variables exist in the Model: Independence of internal auditors, Scope of internal auditors, Management support, Audited cooperation and Satisfaction of internal auditors.Independent variablesThis study aims to explore the critical factors influencing internal auditor effectiveness among industrial SMEs in Kuwait. In order to attain the research goals, the research hypotheses are proposed:I.Independence of Internal AuditorsIn terms of audit function, auditor independence has long been deemed to be a crucial driver as evidenced by the independence definition provided by ISPPIA (glossary) that described independence as the liberation from circumstances threatening objectivity or its appearance and that such objectivity needs to be managed through different levels (individual auditor, engagement, functional and organizational). Internal audit independence is a crucial element of corporate governance and the control system, and without it, the IA department becomes lost in the management group in that it will no longer provide an objective point of view (Al-Twaijry et al., 2003). Moreover, internal audit independence according to prior studies (Abu-Azza, 2012; Cohen and Sayag, 2010; Mihret et al., 2010), positively correlates with perceived effectiveness of IA. Regardless of its importance, independence of IA has received minimal attention from researchers. Accordingly, this study enriches the findings of the earlier studies as it looks into the association between internal auditor independence and IA effectiveness. Based on this discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed for testing;H1a: Independence of internal auditor positively impacts internal auditor’s effectiveness.H1b: Independence of internal auditor highly positively impacts internal auditor’s effectiveness mediated by satisfaction of internal auditors.II.Work Scope of Internal AuditorsThe work scope of the internal auditors is also a significant factor affecting IA effectiveness. IA throughout the years, has extended from the evaluation and measurement of internal control effectiveness to the delivery of consultation linked to organizational operations and system developments (Dittenhofer, 2001). Added to this, the IA scope covers services associated with consulting and assurance which include systematic review, reporting and appraisal of system adequacy in terms of finance, management, operations and budget control (Cohen and Sayag, 2010; IIA, 2016; Sakour and Laila, 2015).In a related study conducted by Mihret et al. (2010), the authors revealed a positive relationship between IA work scope and IA effectiveness and as such, it is only logical to examine such relationship in this research in the context of Kuwaiti firms.H2a: Work Scope of Internal Auditors impacts positively on internal auditor’s effectiveness.H2b: Work Scope of Internal Auditors highly positively impacts internal auditor’s effectiveness mediated by satisfaction of internal auditors.III.Management SupportManagement support and commitment have also been evidenced to impact IA effectiveness. In fact, successful IA function depends on the support demonstrated by the management on the process of auditing. It is important that managers acknowledge the fact that IA is a crucial process and activity like any other activities performed within the organization.In Mihret and Yismaw (2007) study, they highlighted the need to focus on IA recommendations and despite the well-prepared audit reports, the audit results in the past are not highlighted and consistently presented. Aside from this, the authors showed that audit evidence is linked with the reports indicating that the audit reports are physically bulky, which minimizes their readability. Also, the distribution of auditreports is restricted and thus, copies are not forwarded to senior management officers that relate to them. The authors reached to the conclusion that management support for internal audit determines internal audit effectiveness.H3a: Management Support impacts positively on internal auditor’s effectiveness.H3b: Management Support highly positively impacts internal audito’s effectiveness mediated by satisfaction of internal auditors.IV.Audited cooperationIn turn, auditee’s cooperation level impacts the degree to which IA properly attains its objectives (Al‐Twaijry et al., 2003; Mihret and Yismaw, 2007). Hence, auditee’s lack of cooperation can possibly obstruct the endeavour in attaining effective internal audit work. This is because full cooperation from auditee is necessary to allow internal auditors full access to all activities, records and properties (Ahmad et al., 2009). Within the companies in Saudi Arabia, Al‐Twaijryet et al. (2003) found low levels of auditee cooperation. This is especially true when the scope of audit is expanded outside of the traditional domains. Such situation, as argued by the authors, contributes to low levels of IA recommendations’implementation.H4a: Auditee cooperation impacts positively on internal auditor’s effectiveness.H4b: Auditee cooperation highly positively impacts on internal auditor’s effectiveness mediated by satisfaction of internal auditors.Satisfaction of Internal Auditors as a Moderating VariableThe pay satisfaction of employees is described by the level to which employees feel satisfaction towards financial rewards they obtain in terms of the level and process for the work they do (Shahnawaz and Jafri, 2009). It is one of the top crucial factors that measure the effectiveness of the organization (Heneman et al., 1997). Organizations having satisfied employees appear to display more effectiveness compared to their counterparts with dissatisfied employees (Shahnawaz and Jafri, 2009). In a narrower context of internal auditors, Shahnawaz and Jafri (2009) stated that majority of internal auditors were not satisfied with their jobs. This could result in lower productivity and performance. Abu-Azza (2012) supported this claim by his findings that showed the majority of internal auditors working for Libyan publicenterprises appear to be dissatisfied with their pay.H5: Satisfaction of Internal Auditors impacts positively on internal auditor’s effectiveness.5.ConclusionsThe aim of this research proposal is to look into the impact of the four factors that are linked to IA effectiveness moderated by satisfaction of internal auditors within the Kuwaiti industrial SMEs. This study contributes in the body of knowledge by expanding the already available literature on the IA effectiveness via the determination of the effectiveness of IA at the industrial firms employing the theories and variables that were previously identified and highlighted.中文译文：科威特工业中小企业内部审计有效性的理论探讨摘要本文旨在审查内部审计的有效性与国际内部审计专业实务标准（ISPPIA）有关的四个因素之间的关系：内部审计师的独立性，内部审计师的工作范围，管理支持和审计合作。

外文文献及原稿原稿IntroductionInt ernal a ud it ef fe ctive n e s s, t h e ext e nt t o whic h an inte r nal a udit offic e me e ts i ts ra ison d'êt re, i s a r guably a result o f the i n t e rpla y a mong four fa c tors: in t erna l audi tq uali t y; management support; or gani z at i onal sett i ng; and attributes of the audi t or.An i nt ern al audit func t ion's capabil i ty to provi de us eful a udi t findi ngs and re commendations w oul d help ra isemanagement'sintere s ti n it s re c omm e ndation s.T he m a na gementsupportw i thresourcesandc om mi t me nt to i mplement t heinternal a udi t reco m me nd ationsi s essenti a l in attainingaudit e ffec t ive ne s s.A l s o,the o rganizati o nals et ting i n w hi c h i ntern a laudit ope rat e s,i.e.t he or ga nizatio na ls t at us ofth eof fi ce,i t si nt erna lor ganizatio n andthepoli c ie s andpr oc edure s applyi ng t o eachaudi t o r, sho ul d enable smooth audi t s t ha t l ea d to reaching us e f ul a udi tfindings.Furth e r,thecapab i li t y,at t itudesandl e velofcoopera t ionoftheaudi t or i mpacton t heeffec t ive ne ss ofaud i ts.T herefore, internal audit ef fe ct i veness s houl d be vie w e d as a dynamicprocessthat is c ontinuously s ha ped by t h e interac t ions among t he fo ur factors me ntionedabove.Thi s s t udy e xami n ed,u singcasestudyan a lysis,t heint e rnala udi ts e rvic eof ala rgepublicsectororganization.Thepaperisstructuredasfollows.Thenextsectionpresents a review of the related literature; introduces a model for analyzingauditeffectiveness; and provides the research question. The third section presentstheresearch methodology; fourth section provides empirical analysis based on acasestudy; and fifth section presents a summary of the findings. The paperthensummarizes the conclusions, noting limitations of the study and suggesting avenuesfor futureresearch. InternalauditeffectivenessThe Instituteof Internal Auditors (IIA, 1999a) defined internal auditing as:an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add valueandimprove an organization's operations. It helps an organization accomplish itsobjectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improvetheeffectiveness of risk management, control, and governanceprocesses.This definition signifies that internal audit has undergone a paradigmshift froman emphasis on accountability about the past to improving future outcomes tohelpauditors operate more effectively and efficiently (Nagy and Canker, 2002; Stern,1994;Goodwin, 2004). Since, the definition equally serves both the private and thepublicsectors (Goodwin, 2004), it is used in this study as a basis to analyze publicsectorinternal auditeffectiveness.Internal audit is effective if it meets the intended outcome it is supposed tobringabout.Sawyer(1995)states,“…internalauditor'sjobisnotdoneuntildefectsarecorrecte d and remain corrected.”Van Hansberger (2005) explains that internalauditeffectiveness in the public sector should be evaluated by the extent to whichitcontributes to the demonstration of effective and efficient service delivery, asthisdrives the demand for improved internal audit services. Based on the results ofaconsultative forum that focused on improving public sector internal audit [1],VanHansberger (2005) identified perceptionsandownership; organizationandgovernance framework; legislation; improved professionalism; conceptualframework;and also resources as factors influencing internal audit effectiveness.Effectiveinternal audit undertakes an independent evaluation of financial andoperatinginformation and of systems and procedures, to provide useful recommendationsfor improvements asnecessary.The effectiveness of internal audit greatly contributes to the effectiveness ofeachauditor in particular andthe organization at large (Dittenhofer, 2001).Dittenhofer(2001) has also observed that if internal audit quality is maintained, it will contributeto the appropriateness of procedures and operations of the auditor, and therebyinternal audit contributes to effectiveness of the auditor and the organization asawhole. Using agency theory, Dingdong (1997) explained the role that internalauditplays in an economy and points out that internal audit has an advantage over externalauditin obtaining information quickly and finding problems at an earlier stage; and Sparkman (1997), applying the theory of transaction cost economics, demonstratedhow internal audit recommendations are important to the management ofgovernmentorganizations.Priorliteraturerelatingtointernalauditeffectivenesshaseitherfocusedontheinternal audit's ability to plan, execute and objectively communicate usefulfindings(Dingdong, 1997 Sparkman, 1997;Dittenhofer, 2001); or taken a broader viewandincluded factors that transcend the boundary of a single organization (VanHansberger,2005). This paper attempts to introduce a new perspective for evaluation of internalaudit effectiveness by identifying factors within an organization that impact onauditeffectiveness. A model, which assumes that there is a common interest to achieveorganizational goals for auditor management, top management and internal audit,isused for analysis of this case study. Since, audit effectiveness fosters theachievementof a common goal; there would be a natural incentive in an organization to improveit.The model considers four potential factors –internal audit quality,managementsupport, organizational setting, and auditor attributes to explain audit effectiveness,and shows how the interaction of these factors improves audit effectiveness.Internal audit quality, which is determined by the internal audit department'scapability to provide useful findings and recommendations, is central toauditeffectiveness. Internal audit has to prove that it is of value to the organization and earna reputation in the organization (Sawyer, 1995). Internal audit has to evaluateitsperformance and continually improve its service .audit quality is a function ofthelevelofstaffexpertise,thescopeofservicesprovidedandtheextenttowhichaudits areprope rlyplanned,executedandcommunicated.Audit findings and recommendations would not serve much purposeunlessmanagement is committed to implement them. Adams (1994) used agency theorytoexplain that it is in the interest of management to maintain a strong internalauditdepartment. Implementation of audit recommendations is highly relevant toauditeffectiveness (Van Hansberger, 2005) and the management of an organization isviewed as the customer receiving internal audit services. As a result,management'scommitment to useaudit recommendations and its support in strengthening internalauditis vital to audit effectiveness (Sawyer,1995).Organizational setting refers to the organizational profile, internal organizationand budgetary status of the internal audit office; and also the organizationalpoliciesand procedures that guide operation of auditors. It provides the context inwhichinternal audit operates. Thus, organizational setting can exert influence on the levelofeffectiveness that internal audit could achieve. The auditor attributes relate tothecapability of the auditor to meet its intended objectives. Auditor attributeswithimplications on audit effectiveness include the auditors' proficiency to efficientlyandeffectively meet organizational sub-goals; their attitude towards internal audit; andthelevel of cooperation provided to the auditor .Since, the four factors discussed aboveare intricately linked, audit effectiveness is a dynamic process that results fromtheeffect of each factor and the interplay among all. audit quality andmanagementsupport strongly affects audit effectiveness. Better audit effectiveness, in turn, hasapositivebearingonthesetwofactors.Ifinternalaudit enhancesqualitytotheextent itelicits management's interest, management support would be a natural quid proquobecause the management would realize the contribution of internal audit totheachievement of organizational goals. This would positively reflecton auditqualityand enhance audit effectiveness. The management's commitment to implementauditrecommendations improves the operation of the auditor, as a result of whichtheauditor attributes would improve to the benefit of audit effectiveness.Further,management retains the authority to improve the organizational setting andinfluencethe auditor towards a positive effect on audit effectiveness, whichin turn,benefitsauditquality.ConcludingcommentsThis study investigated the internal audit service of a large public sectorhighereducational institution, to identify factors influencing internal audit effectiveness,using a model developed for the analysis. The model consisted of fourinterrelatedfactors: internal audit quality; management support; the organizational setting;andattributes of theauditors.The findings of the study reveal that the internal audit office of theorganizationstudied needs to enhance the technical proficiency of the internal audit staffandminimizestaff turnover so as to foster audit effectiveness. The organizational statusand internal organization of the internal audit office are fairly rated, butinternalaudit'slackofauthorityonbudgetsreducesitscontrolofresourceacquisitionandutil ization.The scope of internal audit services is limited to regular activities. Extendingthescopeofservicesbywideningtherangeofsystemsandactivitiesaudited,withappropr iateriskanalysis,wouldimprove auditeffectiveness. Management'scommitment in providing greater attention to internalaudit recommendations andstaffingtheofficewithwell-qualifiedemployeesdeservesattentioninthisstudy.Theinternalauditors,undertheimpressionthat theirreportsarenotsufficientlyutilizedbythe management, may not be encouraged to exert the maximum possible effort in their engagements. In addition, the lack of attention by management may send awrongsignal about the importance of internal audit services to the audited, which in turnadversely affects the auditedattributes.The study has shown that internal audit of the organization studiedneedsimprovement in the areas of audit planning, documentation of audit work,auditcommunications and follow-up of recommendations. Audit effectiveness couldbeenhanced by ensuring consistency in documenting audit work to enableimprovedreview of audit work; proper follow-up of the status of audit findingsandrecommendations; increased distribution of audit reports; and further improvementinthe quality ofreporting.The limitation of this study is readily apparent. As in all case studies,thegeneralisabilityof the findings and the conclusions drawn is limited, althoughthestudy does provide evidence of the problems internal auditors face in providinganeffective service to management. Further, research could be welcome tofullyunderstand the level of internal audit effectiveness in the Ethiopian public sectorvis-à-vis its private sector, with a view to highlighting differences, if any,andconclusively defining the variables affecting internal audit effectiveness inEthiopia.译文简介内部审计的有效性，在何种程度上满足了内部审计处其存在的理由，可以说是一个四因素之间的相互作用的结果：内部审计质量，管理支持，组织设臵，以及受审核方属性。

企业内部审计文献（中英文版）Task Title: Internal Audit LiteratureInternal audit is a crucial function within organizations, providing independent assurance to management and the board that risk management, control, and governance processes are effective.The internal audit literature encompasses a wide range of topics, from the theoretical underpinnings of internal auditing to practical guidance on how to conduct audits and implement internal controls.企业内部审计是一个组织中至关重要的职能，它为管理层和董事会提供独立保证，确保风险管理、控制和治理流程有效。

企业内部审计文献涵盖了一系列广泛的主题，从内部审计的理论基础到关于如何进行审计和实施内部控制的实际指导。

One of the foundational texts in the field is the "International Professional Practices Framework" (IPPF) published by the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA).This provides a comprehensive set of guidelines for internal auditors, covering areas such as audit planning, execution, and reporting.Another key resource is the "Code of Ethics" established by the IIA, which outlines the ethical principles that internal auditors should adhere to in their work.在该领域，国际内部审计师协会（IIA）发布的《国际专业实践框架》（IPPF）是一个基础文本，为内部审计员提供了一套全面的指导原则，涵盖审计计划、执行和报告等领域的内容。

外文文献翻译原文+译文文献来源：Adams C. Role of internal audit in the organisations[J]. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2017, 1(2): 78-99.原文Role of internal audit in the organizationsAdams CINTRODUCTIONWith the transformations experienced by the corporate world, virtually related to globalization, there has been increased competition between organisations which forced management to take decisions with greater confidence. This does not only mean to keep pace with the rate at which businesses are growing, but also to develop them in a more sustainable manner. Thus, to achieve these goals, it has been necessary to improve the management methods, tools and techniques enhanced by the internal auditing function.The Internal Audit Function (IAF) fits into this scenario because it is an important tool available to stakeholders, internal and externally, as it is construed as an ongoing function, in order to support management in monitoring and surveillance of the planned activities, in both productive and financial areas, evaluating and reporting improvements with respect to the weaknesses, aiming to add value to the organisation.In this context, this study was based on the answers to the followingquestion: what is the perception of management on the role that Internal Audit plays in management practices and decision-making within the organisations? The present study has its relevance in exploring the role IAF is playing to mitigate the dissatisfaction of the business community after accounting and financial scandals which involved auditing as a whole and as has been notoriously publicised. These Media also showed situations where there have been failures by auditing, causing discredit to the activity. Additionally, there is the lack of academic researches on the role that Internal Audit has in management practices and decision making in organisations.This research is aimed at provoking a reflection upon the contribution of Internal Audit Function in decision making in the organisations in order to bring greater credibility to this area of applied social sciences. We hope it inspires further researches on topics addressing Internal Audit Functions in the academic environment.The study focused on non-financial organisations in the State of S o Paulo, whose shares are traded at S o Paulo Stock Exchange, excluding telephone organisations, sanitation, electricity and gas, because these organisations provide services of basic needs to the population and have a different administrative focus.The delimitation of the research to the State of S o Paulo was due to the fact that it is the Brazilian state with the highest concentration oforganisations with shares traded at BM&FBOVESPA. This entity requires of the organisations in its portfolio a good organizational structure and high degree of disclosure, which somehow gave credibility to the data obtained.Concept and objectives of internal auditIt is barely impossible to conceptualise internal audit considering the diversity of its application in business entities. Even so, one would cite the concept provided by the Brazilian Institute of Internal Auditors (AUDIBRA, 1991, p. 33). Internal Audit is an activity of independent evaluation and management assistance, directed to the examination and evaluation of the adequacy, efficiency and effectiveness of the internal control system, as well as of the quality of performance of the operational areas in relation to their tasks and plans, goals, objectives, and policies defined for them.Noteworthy, that effectiveness means adequate exploration of the resources to achieve the goals while efficiency means that required indexes were achieved using the minimum and necessary efforts. Thus, the internal auditor’s opinion should state whether the entity is being effective and efficient in achieving its goals.According to Vasconcelos and Pereira (2004, p. 69-70), the scope of binomial efficiency and effectiveness is a functional view that the organisation’s stakeholders have of the Internal Audit work [...] TheInternal Auditor, in our view, should monitor and seek to understand these dynamics and their effects on the economic and financial status. Therefore, we argue that this professional is the best suited to signal the potential risks of going concern of organisations considering operational anomalies.That is, it would be up to him, based on analysis to provide a straight forward assistance in the monitoring of the financial situation. Our most important argument rests on the following premise: the internal auditor may propose directives and valuable information based on their historical data and rapport with the organisations’ management.Quoting CFC (2005) NBC TI 01, the Brazilian Federal Council of Accountants, characterizes the functions of Internal Audit: [...] as structured with technical, objective, systematic and disciplined procedures, that aims to add value to the results of the organisation, providing data for the improvement of processes, management and internal controls through the recommendation of solutions for nonconformities identified in the reports.In this same way, CFC (2011) emphasizes the managerial support that internal audit has to provide so that business objectives are attained in a more adequate manner. This explicitly defines Internal Audit as an advisory body to the management of the entities, aiming to add value by providing data for improvement of management processes.According to Mendes (1996, p. 9), the objective of the Internal Audit is, in particular, “[...] forming opinion about the criteria, proced ures, methods and quantification, cost rationalization and providing information so that the top management decisions are based on concrete information.” The decisions to be made by management always depend on good information, that is, accurate and timely.The Internal Audit is an instrument of administrative control and systematic verification of the effectiveness and efficiency of occupational activities in the company; it evaluates the entity’s internal controls and its administrative and occupational processes, analyzing the failures and the risk involved and gives broad based recommendations for remediation of anomalies. The Internal Audit work aims to protect the company’s assets against frauds or intentional misstatements. Classified by Moyes et al. (2013) as i) misstatements resulting from fraudulent financial reporting and ii) misstatement resulting from misappropriation of assets. Characteristics of the internal audit function (IAF)The role of Internal Audit is presented through various concepts expressed by scholars with different characteristics of its functions and activities that converge to its main objective, which is to add value to organizations through assessments and advisory support to management.Since WorldCom whistle-blowing and other financial scandals that besieged the stock markets in the last decade, internal audit has assumed amore important role. The NYSE now requires all companies listed there to maintain internal audit functions to provide management and the audit committee w ith ongoing assessment of the company’s risk management process and of internal control, (Harrington, 2004 p. 65).Thus, Internal Audit should be knowledgeable, insightful, have the method, and the intelligence to check the best for the company, aiming to add value with the least resources. Internal Audit should be “[...] a highly qualified adviser, which allows the management to have a systematic view of their organisation. It must be a unit engaged in achievement of end results (Mendes 1996., p. 9).Authors such as Carvalho and Pinho (2004. p. 24), Vasconcelos and Pereira (2004, p. 68), who understand that the Internal Audit has a professional duty to issue independent opinions, justify the assumptions of technical skills and personal attributes required of the auditor, as well as the high level of demand from users and the need to add value to users of their services.The IAF in the organisation is to review, evaluate and produce report containing information on all activities of the organisation, to assist the management in their decision making process. Internal Audit performs a task that shareholders would like to perform in order to be always aware of how their investments are managed.Apart from overseeing the activities, based on the broad knowledgeof the business, IAF could be used to substitute certain strategic functions most importantly when a need for rotation arises. Companies that have an IAF specifically hire internal auditors with the purpose of rotating them into management positions or cycle current employees into the IAF for a short stint before promoting them into management positions (Messier et al., 2011, p. 2131).Vasconcelos and Pereira (2004, p. 70) emphatically point out that “[...] the exercise of Internal Audit is not a commodity. It is not a consumable service much less a mere cog. It is a potential value aggregator. “This characterization clearly demonstrates how valuable the internal function is when fully exerting its activities.Internal audit function adding valueIt is of paramount importance to characterize what adding value is, so that we can analyze the contribution of Internal Audit to the management of the entities. The interpretation of value, in this study, is not only limited to the financial aspects; it is more comprehensive, as it includes human and physical aspects. So, to add value in the internal audit concept is to harness all available resources, within and outside the company, with an aim of assuring gains, which may be financial, material and human, and will assist management in fulfilling their goals.Internal Audit Function may add value in various accounting processes where transactions are originated in an organisation. Forinstance, the evaluation of capital investments and their association with the capital budget when adequately checked to guarantee that such project is feasible tends to add value. Another value adding function is the assessment and or follow-up of the development and implementation of ERPs; which ensures the timing of the systems at an affordable cost and to meet up with operational necessities. The continuous auditing also adds value by installing the required technologies in the control environment to ensure that alerts are given when unusual transactions are run in the operational environment of the organisation. Directors believe that top management is appropriately defining the organisation’s internal audit function, and that the profession should concentrate its effects on providing guidance and support. “....most of their audit depar tments have shifted toward a more value-added” (Nagy and Cenker, pp. 136, 2002).Be it known that the wealth of knowledge acquired by the IAF during the auditing of the business, which makes one say that it knows it better that any other person in the organisation makes the IAF a training ground for the management posts.The Internal Audit, when monitoring and assessing the adequacy of internal controls, as well as the rules and procedures implemented by management, becomes an ally of real value to the management. It is a tool that, according to Santos (2007, p. 9) “[...] plays a role of great importance, helping to eliminate wastes, simplify tasks, supportmanagement and report to management on the development of tasks performed”. The thought is in line wit h the implementation of loss prevention nowadays when artefacts are installed to safeguard assets.Whistle blowing has been termed as more effective when considering some tools monitored by IAF to track frauds and corruption, notwithstanding, internal audit collaborates in the minimisation of the risks of frauds and potential errors that could result in a material misstatement. The level of the IAF and the extent to which the IAF incorporates quality assurance techniques into fieldwork and audits activities related to financial reporting, monitors the remediation of previously identified control problems. Also, the timing of Section 404 work and the nature of follow-up monitoring suggests that these aspects of IAF quality help prevent material weaknesses (MWs) from occurring (Lin et al., 2011, p. 287).Internal Audit plays a strategic role in organizations because it aims to add value to the results of the organisation, providing information to improve risk management and internal controls procedures. It is considered one of the pillars of corporate governance as it provides evaluation services and consulting. In other words, it is an important piece to the management of organisations, since it matches the results obtained with the strategy and the action plan prepared by the company in order to identify threats and/or opportunities for the achievement of futureresults.The existence of a good and active internal audit in the organisation is in itself a value-addition, considering that it could be used to reduce the amount of work that is required of the independent auditor with referece to IFAC 610. The usage of internal audit work by the independent auditors is generally considered in the extent deemed satisfactory to cover certain test that ought to be corroborated by the engagement.译文内部审计在组织中的作用引言企业界经历的转换实际上与全球化相关,组织之间的竞争加剧,迫使管理者更有把握地作出决策。

中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Internal auditing's role in ERMAs organizations lay their enterprise risk groundwork, many auditors are taking on management's oversight responsibilities, new research finds.Internal audit departments have played a variety of roles in their organization's enterprise risk management (ERM) activities since The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Tread way Commission (COSO) released its Enterprise Risk Management-Integrated Framework in September 2004. An IIA position paper issued in the wake of COSO ERM, "The Role of Internal Auditing in Enterprise-wide Risk Management," indicates the roles that the internal audit function should and should not play throughout the ERM process, ranging from full involvement to no involvement. According to the paper, internal auditors should have a core role in five ERM-related assurance activities: giving assurance on risk management processes, giving assurance that risks are evaluated correctly, evaluating risk managementprocesses, evaluating the reporting of key risks, and reviewing the management of key risks.A recent IIA Research Foundation study examined the extent to which internal audit functions adhere to the ERM roles recommended in the IIA paper. During October 2005, researchers disseminated an online survey to 7,200 IIA members through The Institute's Global Auditing Information Network. The survey generated 361 responses from a mix of large, mid-sized, and small organizations in a variety of industries, including businesses, government agencies, and not for profit organizations. Nearly 60 percent of respondents identified themselves as a chief audit executive or audit director, 23 percent were audit managers, and 7.8 percent were staff or senior auditors. Approximately 90 percent were from the United States and Canada.Respondents' organizations are at different stages of implementing ERM, as defined by COSO. More than 11 percent say their organization's ERM infrastructure is mature or relatively mature, and 37 percent have recently adopted or are in the process of implementing ERM. Among all organizations surveyed, the internal audit function is primarily responsible for ERM-related activities in 36 percent of respondents' organizations, while 27 percent say the primary responsibility belongs to a chief risk officer (CRO) who is not part of the audit function. Nearly one-third of respondents say another executive or function oversees ERM..The hours and dollars internal audit functions spend on ERM-related activities are minimal for many respondents. Nearly half say their audit department spent 10 percent or less of its hourly and financial budgets on ERM-related activities during fiscal year 2004. More than one-third of audit departments spent II percent to 50 percent of their time on ERM, and 28 percent spent n percent to 50 percent of their financial budgets, while less than 10 percent of departments Spent more than 50 percent of their time and money.The IIA position paper categorizes 18 ERM-related activities according to the appropriate level of responsibility for the internal audit function. Survey respondents reported their current and ideal level of responsibility for these activities: no responsibility, limited responsibility, moderate responsibility, substantialresponsibility, and total responsibility.CORE ACTIVITIESDifferences between respondents' current and ideal responsibilities are greatest for the five core ERM assurance activities identified In the IIA paper. Respondents Indicated that their current responsibility for each of the core ERM related activities is moderate, but they say they should have a substantial level of responsibility. These views agree with the IIA guidance. Additionally, roughly half of internal audit functions surveyed currently have substantial or full responsibility for at least one core activity, and more than two-thirds say they should have till or substantial responsibility for at least one core activity.Within the core category, the audit function's two highest levels of current responsibility involve reviewing management of key risks and evaluating the risk management process. Evaluating the risk management process and giving assurance on risk management processes are the highest-rated ideal responsibilities. Conversely, giving assurance that risks are evaluated correctly is the lowest-rated current and ideal responsibility.The following respondent comments offer some insight into why audit departments are not currently involved in core ERM-related activities at the level they deem appropriate;"We have just recently begun implementing ERM activities in our company. We do not yet have complete understanding of the process and buy-in from management.""The audit committee and management are not aware of what ERM is.""The internal audit function has just initiated an awareness campaign among the audit committee members."These comments suggest that educating management and the audit committee on ERM issues can be critical to ensuring that the audit function takes on an appropriate level of responsibility for ERM.LEGITIMATE ACTIVITIESThe IIA paper prescribes seven legitimate ERM-related activities for which internal committee audit functions may be responsible as long as safeguards are inplace: facilitating the identification and evaluation of risks, coaching management in responding to risks, coordinating ERM-related activities, consolidating the reporting on risks, maintaining and developing the ERM framework, championing establishment of ERM, and developing risk management strategy for board approval. These activities are described as "consulting" activities. Although respondents' current responsibility for each of these legitimate activities ranges from limited to moderate, they say their ideal level should be moderate, which is consistent with the guidance.Within the legitimate category, the highest level of current internal audit responsibility involves facilitating the identification and evaluation of risks —the top-rated ERM-related activity, including core activities. This activity is also the highest-rated ideal activity among legitimate activities, suggesting that auditors consider it a core responsibility. This finding is not surprising. because risk detection and evaluation are traditional considerations in developing annual audit plans. The lowest-rated current and ideal activity is developing a risk management strategy for board approval, which is an activity that might best be handled by management.The IIA guidance cautions that when internal auditors undertake these legitimate consulting activities, safeguards should be in place to ensure that they do not take on management responsibility for actually managing risks. One possible preventive measure would include documenting the auditors' ERM responsibilities in an audit committee-approved audit charter. Further, if auditors take on any ERM-related activities that fall within this consulting role, they should treat these engagements as consulting engagements and apply the relevant IIA standards to help ensure their independence and objectivity.INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVITIESAccording to the IIA position paper. It is inappropriate for internal auditors to be responsible for six ERM-related activities: setting the risk appetite, imposing risk management processes, providing management assurance on risks, making decisions on risk responses, implementing risk responses on management's behalf, and having accountability for risk management. Overall, audit functions in the survey have greater responsibility for these activities than the IIA paper recommends. However,auditors say they should have some limited responsibility for the inappropriate activities.Within the inappropriate category, internal auditors' highest level of current and ideal responsibility is providing management assurance on risks, while their lowest level of responsibility is for setting the risk appetite. Respondents' comments suggest that auditors currently have greater responsibilities in these areas because the audit function is playing a leading role during the early stages of ERM development.ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICSThe perceived current and ideal FRM roles for the internal audit function may vary across organizations, depending on the organization's industry, size, and audit department size, as well as the firm's need to comply with the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.INDUSTRY Respondents work in a variety of sectors, including financial services, manufacturing, transportation, communications, utilities, health care, retail and wholesale, government, and education. Researchers compared responses from the two largest industry groups: financial services and manufacturing. On average, financial service industry audit departments have greater current responsibility for core activities than those from manufacturing. With respect to inappropriate activities, manufacturing audit departments tend to say their ideal involvement should be higher than their current responsibility, while financial service industry audit departments rate their current and ideal responsibilities at the same level.ORGANIZATION SIZE Approximately half of respondents work in organizations that had 2004 revenues between US $500 million and US $5 billion. Nearly 25 percent of respondents work in organizations that had revenues under US $500 million in 2004, while a similar number of respondents work in organizations that had more than US $5 billion in revenue that year. Researchers compared responses from organizations with revenues of less than US $1 billion with organizations with revenues greater than US $1 billion. On average, auditors from both types of organizations have relatively equal levels of responsibility for current core activities. However, smaller organizations rated their ideal involvement for thesecore activities higher than large organizations. Smaller organizations have a slightly higher current level of responsibility for inappropriate activities than larger organizations and say their ideal involvement in these areas should be higher.AUDIT STAFF SIZE More than half of respondents work in audit departments with 10 or fewer auditors, slightly more than one-quarter work in departments with between 11 and 50 auditors, and approximately one-tenth of respondents work in departments with more than 50 auditors. Internal audit functions with more than 10 auditors currently have somewhat more responsibility for core activities than audit departments with 10 or fewer auditors. Both large and small audit functions have roughly equal levels of responsibility for all other ERM-related activities. However, unlike large audit organizations, respondents from small audit departments want to have more responsibility for activities in the inappropriate category.SARBANES-OXLEY Most respondents' organizations are required to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404. Researchers found few differences between those organizations and respondents from organizations that do not have to comply with the act. The primary difference related to core activities, where compliers report a higher level of current responsibility than non-compliers.Although the IIA guidance is equally applicable to all organizations, the research indicates that smaller internal audit departments and those from smaller organizations tend to take on ERM responsibilities that would be more appropriate for management. In these cases, internal auditing should work to develop an ERM implementation and maintenance plan that includes a stratcgy and timeline for migrating responsibilities for these activities to managementTHE AUDITOR'S ROLEAlthough the survey results suggest that the current levels of responsibility audit departments have may differ somewhat from that levels recommended by The IIA'S position paper, the respondents' comments offer some evidence that auditors understand the underlying concepts of the guidance:"There needs to be a shift in the 'doing' of the ERM to being an internal audit function that relies on and evaluates the ERM process. ERM should be in sync withthe audit universe and plan,""In the past i8 months, the corporation has appointed a CRO to provide oversight and guidance to evolving ERM processes. During this period, much of internal auditing's previous ERM roles have migrated to this officer." More importantly, respondents identified significant barriers in their organizations to following the guidance:"These ERM responsibilities and processes are not well defined in many organizations and should be more clearly articulated by senior management."'There is not enough emphasis from the top that risk management is important and must be done effectively. Management is still trying to hide things from internal auditing. It's not them against us, we're all in it together.""Most auditors and enterprise managers lack clarity on the distinction between responsibility for risk assurance implementation versus responsibility for risk assurance compliance and monitoring."These comments stress that a key element to establishing a successful ERM program is education on the importance of ERM and the appropriate roles management and internal auditing have in the process. Internal auditors can play a key role in providing this education. The audit department, management, hoard of directors, and audit committee need to be clear about which ERM related activities internal auditors should perform and which activities should always be performed by management. Relevant training should highlight that internal auditing could serve in a monitoring or consulting role throughout much of the ERM process, but the formal decision-making authority must reside with management if the audit department is to maintain its independence and objectivity.Auditors should take steps to ensure that the board and audit committee are aware of the COSO ERM framework and are actively engaged in overseeing the ERM process. Additionally, auditors should consider training senior management, the board, and others throughout their organization on COSO ERM and related guidance.Responses to the survey provide useful insights into additional steps that the internal audit profession should take. Auditors whose organizations are in the earlystages of adopting ERM or will be implementing ERM in the future have many opportunities to ensure that the process is effective and efficient. For example, audit departments that currendy perform ERM-related activities that should be management's responsibility can take proactive steps to open up the lines of communication between internal auditing and management, the board and audit committee, and external auditors about the risks of this situation. Such communication should encourage management to take on appropriate ERM responsibilities. One approach audit departments could take is to develop a business plan describing how management can assume responsibility for ERM related activities for which they should be accountable. However, internal auditors should recognize that completing this plan and convincing management to accept these ERM responsibilities might not occur quickly.With appropriate planning, communication, and education, internal auditors, management, the board, and external auditors should be ready to work together to achieve the many benefits of ERM. Ideally, this coordination will result in performing ERM-related activities at appropriate places within the organization, management accepting its responsibility for ERM, and that audit function playing a role that is consistent with appropriate professional guidance.译文：内部审计在企业风险管理中的作用新的研究发现：随着企业以组织风险为基础，许多审计人员对管理层采取职责监督措施。

文献信息：文献标题：New Product Development, Accounting Information, and Internal Audits: A Proposed Integrative Framework（新产品开发，会计信息和内部审计：一个拟议的综合框架）国外作者：Kanyamon Wittayapoom文献出处：《Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences》, 2014, 148(148):307-314字数统计：英文3375单词，19083字符；中文6023汉字外文文献：New Product Development, Accounting Information, andInternal Audits: A Proposed Integrative Framework Abstract Innovation activities and processes of an organization have been given considerable attention within the past decade by both managers and academics. The new product development (NPD) process is a critical innovation process that has been explored from different functional perspectives, such as marketing, engineering, finance and manufacturing, due to its interfunctional nature. As new product failure rates continue to remain high, management control systems have become an important issue. While perceptions of the ‘intervention’ of accounting practices in business processes have been widely regarded as unwelcome constraints on innovation (e.g. R&D), the view taken here is that accounting, particularly the tasks of auditing, becomes an integral internal information generating activity that enhances, rather than constrains, the NPD process and ultimately overall NPD team performance. The purpose of this paper is to identify and explain accounting information and accounting audit tasks that are essential for efficient execution of the NPD process. In doing so, a conceptual framework is presented, which integrates accounting information andpractices into the NPD process. Moreover, it is argued that the extent to which accounting information is actually utilized as part of the NPD process has an influence on the performance outcomes of the NPD process. Theoretical and practical contributions, as well as suggestions for future research are also discussed.Keywords: New product development; accounting information; accounting audit; team performance1.IntroductionNew product development (NPD) is an important process for a firm’s mar keting team to launch a meaningful innovative product (Racela, O. C., Chaikittisilpa. C., & Thoumrungroje, A. 2010), as an important potential source for competitive advantage (Sheng, S., Zhou, K. Z., & Lessassy, L. 2012), and for cross-functional integration within the organization. The NPD process requires organization resources to create new products with adaptations to interfunctional activity. As failure rates of new products continue to remain high, management control systems have become an important issue in NPD order to exploit new market opportunities and sustain firm profitability (Leenders, M. A. A. M., & Wierenga, B. 2008). The more common management and marketing control systems are often ineffective and an internal audit may prove more useful activities (e.g. cost and financial budgetary into development process within NPD process) as a means of enhancing the NPD process and NPD team performance (Brownlie, D. 1996).A generic NPD process may have five stages including: 1) opportunity identification selection, which involves gathering preliminary information to assess risk and opportunity of a need in the marketplace that can be filled by a new product, 2) concept generation, that involves the generation of ideas for product innovation, 3) concept evaluation, which requires systematic procedures to rate and rank different concepts, 4) development, which implements both technical design and marketing strategy planning, and 5) launch, which is the execution of the marketing plan. During each of these NPD stages, accounting information and accounting audits are crucial in facilitating effective NPD team output and product design.While accounting practices have been widely regarded as unwelcome constraints on innovation (Song, M., & Montoya-Weiss, M. M. 2001, Clark., Kim, B. & Fujimoto, T. 1991), an internal audit process is critical to improve programs that are aimed at reducing error or fraud, to design and control resource allocation, and to evaluate organizational performance in order to reduce non-value adding activities (Sisaye, S. 1999) of the NPD process. Hence, the NPD process is relevant to all kinds of functions within organization, e.g. project management to organize the control system of NPD, the information technology (IT) team to implement and prepare needed software applications and systems, accounting information to estimate budgets, internal audits to control and appropriate approvals, which means organizations must adopt proper strategies to reduce unnecessary costs (Yang, L-R. 2012).According to organization theory, product team performance enhances the application of knowledge that is needed for the creation of innovative ideas for NPD (Ju, T. L., Li, C. Y., & Lee, T. S. 2006). From a resource-based view, organizational knowledge and expertise are valuable, rare, and non-substitutable resources. Different sources of knowledge, particularly from accounting information and internal audits, become a valuable means to achieve competitive advantage (Barney, J. B. 1991). The NPD process integrates different knowledge and perspectives from different functions (Poon, J. P. H. & MacPherson, A. 2005), thus applying tacit knowledge and codified knowledge of the organization (Boer, M. D., & Bosch, V. D. 1999).The purpose of this paper is to explore and discuss accounting information and accounting audit task that are essential for efficiency execution of the NPD process and better NPD team performance. In this paper, NPD team performance refers to effectiveness, efficiency, and economy based on NPD teamwork. The highlight of this paper is that it attempts to integrate accounting information and practices into the NPD process, particularly the tasks of auditing, and suggests that such information generating activities enhance, rather than constrains, the NPD process and ultimately overall NPD team performance. Moreover, it is argued that the extent to which accounting information is actually utilized as part of the NPD process has an influence on the performance outcomes of the NPD process.2.Theoretical FrameworkTo expand the conceptualization of the NPD process in order to integrate accounting information and internal audits, the relationships among concepts are based on the theoretical underpinnings of the resources-based view of the firm (RBV) and contingency theory. RBV posits that different resources within the organization, like those in marketing, human resource, accounting and financial management are deployed to execute processes, including the execution of the NPD stages (Morgan, N.A., Clark,B. H., & Gooner, R. 2002, Wernerfelt, B. 1984). NPD resources can include accounting knowledge and internal audits that the NPD team uses to learn and support part of NPD process (Durmuşoğlu, S. S., & Barczak, G. 2011) because the new product team relies on a variety of knowledge from different functions in order to proceed effectively through the NPD process. Therefore, accounting information and internal audits can be regarded as information that are used to facilitate knowledge creation in a NPD process.In general, the sources of knowledge, particularly accounting information, can help NPD team members to improve their contributions to NPD and to the team. Within organizations, knowledge from different sources may be necessary, thus the transferring and sharing of knowledge and practices within and between organizational units is related to the resource-based view of the firm (RBV). To explain the existence of knowledge, such as in project management, IT management, or accounting management in NPD processes, knowledge of and from the NPD process includes the management of different resources and considerations such as scope, time, cost, quality, human resource, communication risk, or procurement. RBV, which was initially established in organizational studies and widely used in the field of strategic management, helps to understand the internal resources of an organization that can be deployed to achieve a competitive advantage (Grant, R. M. 1996). Such resources include organizational processes, knowledge, and know-how from both tacit and codified knowledge from the organization and employees, which is regarded as tangible and intangible assets. Within the RBV, the different sources of knowledgecan help the organization to formulate strategy and to generate competitive advantage (Kaleka, A. 2002) to achieve superior marketing outcomes (McGrath, R. MacMillan, I. & Venkatraman, S. 1994) and team performance. Because innovation activities and processes of an organization have been given considerable attention, the new product development (NPD) process is considered a critical innovation process that has been explored from different functional perspectives. Therefore, sources of knowledge from different functional units within an organization are necessary. The NPD team needs a variety of knowledge and know-how from each professional function in order to reduce new product failure rates. The NPD team also needs a high degree of knowledge sharing from NPD team members. Hence, the sources of accounting knowledge practices and knowledge-sharing in business processes have been widely regarded, as the tasks of auditing become an integral internal information generating activity to enhance, rather than constrain, the NPD process and ultimately overall NPD team performance.Contingency theory argues that organizational behaviors and performance depends on contextual factors (McAdam, R. & McClelland, J. 2002) and suggests that organizational effectiveness is related to corporate characteristics (Chenhall, R. H., 2003). In academic studies, the literature in marketing management, accounting management, and internal auditing shows very little attention given to the role of contingencies within organizations (Morgan, N. A., Clark, B. H., & Gooner, R. 2002). To enhance the likelihood of new product success, management control systems have been adopted to align accounting information and internal audits to NPD. Therefore, in this paper, contingency theory explains how different contexts of internal audit activities influence the NPD process and NPD team performance (Chapman, R. & Hyland, P. 2004). The conceptual model is presented in figure 1.3.Conceptual and Proposition3.1.Sources of Accounting Knowledge and NPD ProcessIn this paper, ‘source of knowledge’refers to the relevant tacit and codified knowledge within an organization and used by organizational members. Sources of knowledge can come from all organizational functions. Accounting knowledge can be considered a source of knowledge that is very important for organizational strategy and management and which is critical to realize improvements in the NPD process (Jørgensen, B. & Messner, M. 2010).Tacit knowledge can be described as knowledge that cannot be easily articulated verbally and is therefore difficult to transfer to or to be understood by another person.Because of this difficulty, tacit knowledge is difficult to imitate and replicate and iseasier to protect (Saarenketo, S., Puumalainen, K., Kuivalainen, O., & Kylaheiko, K. 2004). For instance, a person’s ability that has developed over time through the accumulation of knowledge and gained through practical experience, are often considered forms of tacit knowledge.Tacit knowledge can be better understood by others or groups who are well versed in the particular subject matter and with the language that describes the information, such as a groups of practitioners or professionals of a field (Nightingale, O. 1998). Tacit knowledge also includes knowledge that is embedded in social networks that contains a higher tacit content due to the major mechanism of transferring is rooted in individuals or groups who are necessary for carrying out tasks and processes within the organization. Thus, tacit knowledge from different areas of the organization are necessary for the NPD process whereby the NPD team’s abilities, including those related to accounting and internal auditing, can be a valuable source of knowledge (Chen, S. 2005).Codified knowledge is organized around procedures, properties, facts or axiomatic proposition, transferred via teaching, and interpersonal interaction (Edmonson, A., Winslow, A. B., Bohmer, R. M. J., & Pisano, G. P. 2003). The use of codified knowledge allows persons to increase their knowledge, increase the quantity of information exchanged, clarify information content, and to reduce uncertainty in information sharing. Accounting is considered a main source of codified knowledge. Use of such knowledge also applies within the NPD process, as codified knowledge of accounting information is embedded in the product design (Carbonara, N., & Scozzi, B. 2006). Accounting information can be used to provide direction to the NPD team and in their formulation of strategies for NPD. For instance, knowing and understanding the product’s contribution margins ma y help the NPD team better coordinate proposed production schedules for a new product that will be added to a firm’s current product line. Therefore, based on the tacit and codified knowledge of accounting information, the following proposition is given:Proposition 1: Sources of accounting knowledge enhances the NPD process and NPD team performance.3.2.Internal Audits, NPD Process, Team PerformanceIn recent years, organizations continue to seek ways to improve their NPD process (e.g. reduced cost, and budget) and increase NPD team performance (e.g. effectiveness, efficiency, and economy of product quality). Management control systems are important to ensure better organizational performance (Jaworski, B. J. 1988). NPD team performance is essential for the execution of an efficient NPD process and activities. The NPD team must be comprised of a variety of skills and competence from members of different functions who can bring to the team different knowledge. The concept of internal audit can be useful for NPD team to organize NPD process such as risk assessment, control quality, or managing the team performance.In general terms, an internal audit is the process to examine, monitor, and analyze organizational activities in order to review what the firm is doing in order to assess its health and profitability, identify potential threats, and to advise on ways to mitigate risk of those threats in order to minimize costs. The internal audit is a part of the firm’s administrative structure and involves the tasks of audit planning, audit executing, and audit reporting with an emphasis on accounting information. As already mentioned, internal audit tasks can be related to the stages of the NPD process. The three distinct roles of the internal audit process are:•aud it planning, which involves the collection of preliminary information, the identification and evaluation of risk , and the review of sufficient and appropriate internal controls;•audit execution, which involves checking whether there is appropriate and sufficient audit evidence, selecting an audit sampling technique to collect information for analysis, choosing a number of audit techniques to apply, and documenting the audit; and•audit report, which involves communicating and disseminating information of the new product and the NPD process with which due diligence.From this internal audit process, the NPD team stays informed of the financial aspects of the NPD process and can apply such knowledge in subsequent NPD stages.Given the importance of the NPD process, an internal audit process can be implemented at each stage of the NPD. In the first stage of the NPD process, i.e. opportunity identification and screening of generated concepts, the launch of an internal audit project may appear as a set of key components which includes a plan to conduct the internal audit, with the aim to understand the NPD process and to know how the NPD team identifies market opportunities and how the team evaluates ideas/concepts for further consideration. The audit planning should arise from discussions between members of the NPD team in order to get ‘the big picture’ of the broad context of opportunities for new product development (Stewart, D. W. 2009). Based on this, the internal auditor in the NPD team should:•gather preli minary information by documenting the internal control environment and to obtain information and feedback from NPD team members;•evaluate potential risk related to the NPD process, define performance outcomes that will be used to assess NPD process success, and propose ways to decrease risk; and•conduct an internal control of all stages of the NPD process.Hence, the NPD team, particularly the internal auditor works from preliminary information gathering, risk evaluation, and internal control by making inquiries and reviewing information from interviews, questionnaires, and/or observations of the NPD process activities so that an audit program can be established.Second, when the NPD team evaluates concepts that can be pursued for further development, an internal audit would involve determining a formal audit objective directed at the NPD process and to review NPD team performance and to determine NPD activities that would support the audit objective. The NPD team would need to decide what appropriate information and tools are necessary for NPD (Buyukozkan, G. & Feyzioglu, O. 2004). In essence, for the NPD stage of concept evaluation, the audit activities could include:•ensuring there is appropriate and sufficient audit evidence, which requires the NPD team to collect and maintain documentation to support the internal audit objective and to ensure that documents are appropriate in terms of (i.e. quality andreliability) and sufficient (i.e. quantity) for analysis;•implementing an audit sampling technique w here the NPD team decides which audit sampling technique should be used as a tool for gathering sufficient information (e.g., probability sampling technique or non-probability sampling technique)•adopting several audit techniques in order to test intern al controls, and monitor data assurance, whereby the internal auditor in the NPD team would make inquiries and data from questionnaires, observation or other analytical procedures in order to ensure the NPD process is accurate; and•conducting‘audit’ paperwork with due diligence with the internal auditor of the NPD team applying ‘bookkeeping’ practices of their audit into formal documentation, ensuring accurate information. Due diligence also requires sufficient internal audit skills for the audit results to be given as a recommendation to the NPD team as a formal audit report.Finally, at the last stage of the NPD process, when the new product is ready for launch into the market, the launch should also be communicated within the organization as well as to selected target markets. Similar to the internal audit, after audit team analyzed the process of new product to ensure that NPD process is completed influence to team performance, internal auditor within NPD team should prepare an audit report. The audit reporting generated by the accounting information system on which analyzed the material errors, omissions, and fraud (Chan, D. Y. & Vasarhely, M. A. 2011). While the NPD team ensures that the process of new product system is educate and total quality assurance by internal control system. The total quality assurance refers to NPD team, particularly internal auditor to collections and gathers all activities of NPD process to facilitate the quality control as an internal audit portfolio. Therefore, the following proposition is given:Proposition 2: Internal audit of the NPD process enhances the NPD process and NPD team performance.3.3.Sharing of Accounting InformationAccounting information refers to information from financial statements that are generated from traditional ‘book- keeping’ and which are used for decision-making.While for the most part, accounting information is typically associated with clear and easily understood accounting ratios, it also includes qualitative information such as in the interpretations, implications, and economic consequences of trends and patterns (i.e., costs, expenditures, returns on investments, etc.) not easily detected from financial statements of one reporting period. Information sharing is an important factor that may moderate the influence of sources of accounting knowledge on the NPD process (Song, M., & Thieme, R. J. 2006). This is because the NPD process relies on information (e.g. upgrade product design efficiency) (Venkatasubramanian, V., Zhao, et al 2006) and is a foundation for collaborative NPD design (Kim, K.Y., Manley, D. G., & Yang, H. 2006, Zhanga, S., Shen, W., & Ghenniwa, H. 2004). As part of the NPD process, the internal audit generally is concerned with knowledge from several different functional units, and as such, the NPD team must adapt this shared information to reduce communication error (i.e. tacit and codified knowledge). Thus with improved quality of communication, the sharing of accounting information should enhance the NPD process and NPD team performance (Merminod, V., & Rowe.F. 2012). Therefore, the following proposition is given:Proposition 3: Greater sharing of accounting information within the organization and within the NPD team strengthens the influence of accounting knowledge on the NPD process and NPD team performance4.Implications and ConclusionThis paper discusses the NPD process, accounting knowledge, internal audits, and accounting information and posits that the NPD process can be enhanced through greater use of accounting knowledge and particularly the tasks of auditing. Moreover, greater use and sharing of accounting information as part of the NPD process enhances accounting’s role on the performance outcomes of the NPD process. In this paper, perspectives from RBV and contingency theory are applied to develop and propose a conceptual framework for the posited relationships among constructs. Therefore, this paper makes a theoretical contribution to the areas of knowledge as a resource and postulates that the NPD process needs accounting knowledge and thesharing of information by accounting professionals. This paper also offers managerial implications, since management and NPD team members must understand the need to for control systems to improve NPD and NPD team performance.This paper proposed a conceptual framework that integrates theories and concepts and therefore, future research is needed to conduct empirical analysis to test the posited relationships.中文译文：新产品开发，会计信息和内部审计：一个拟议的综合框架摘要在过去十年中，一个组织的创新活动和过程受到管理者和学术界的相当大的重视。

外文翻译原文Audits of Internal ControlMaterial Source:/cpajournal/2005/505/essentials/p22.htmAuthor: Jack W. PaulMAY 2005 - The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires public accounting firms that audit public companies to register with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) and to adhere to professional standards established by the board for audits of public companies. The PCAOB’s pronouncement, Auditing Standard 2, An Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting Performed in Conjunction with an Audit of Financial Statements, requires auditors to issue an opinion on the effectiveness of their public company clients’ internal control.On June 5, 2003, the SEC issued Release 33-8238 to implement section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOA), which requires management to include in the annual report to shareholders its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control. The company’s external auditors must attest to and report on management’s assessment for fiscal years beginning on or after January 15, 2006, for accelerated filers, and on or after July 15, 2006, for no accelerated filers. Standard 2 imposes many new responsibilities on public companies’ auditors and, by extension, on the public companies themselves. In it over 200 pages, Standard 2 delineates the PCAOB’s expectations for an internal control audit.Auditor’s responsibilities. Standard 2 requires the auditor to do the following: •Understand and evaluate management’s process for assessing the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting.•Plan and conduct an audit of the company’s internal control.•Based on this audit, provide an opinion on management’s written assessment about the effectiveness of the company’s internal control.This opinion incorporates the auditor’s opinion on the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting.These responsibilities augment those required for the financial statement audit. Included EntitiesIn general, the scope of the audit of internal control includes all entities over which management has the ability to affect internal control:•Entities acquired on or before the date of management’s assessment as of the end of the fiscal year, including consolidated entities or those proportionately consolidated; and•Those accounted for as discontinued operations at the end of the fiscal year.In some situations, such as when management does not have the ability to affect the controls of an equity method investee, the auditor’s s cope includes only the controls related to the investor’s financial reporting of its interest in the investee, rather than the controls in place at the investee. The applicable controls are those designed to ensure proper application of the equity method in reporting the company’s proportion of investee income or loss, the investment balance, adjustments, and disclosures. Variable interest entities (VIE), defined in FASB Interpretation 46, are treated in a similar fashion when management is not the primary beneficiary and does not consolidate the VIE. Importantly, the auditor must evaluate the reasonableness of management’s claims regarding its inability to affect controls at such entities.Whereas design effectiveness pertains to whether a control is properly crafted, operating effectiveness deals with use of a properly designed control to prevent, detect, or correct misstatements or irregularities on a timely basis. For example, a daily reconciliation of cash receipts is not effectively designed when the cashier performs the reconciliation. But if an independent person is designated to perform the reconciliation and the other procedures are properly documented, the control is effectively designed. The control is not operating effectively when the independent reconciler either fails to perform the reconciliation daily or does so in a perfunctory manner. Design effectiveness of this control could be tested by reviewing documentation to ensure that the procedures are satisfactory. Operating effectiveness could b e tested by examining the reconciler’s initials on the daily reconciliation sheet.A striking difference between a financial statement and an internal control audit relates to the opportunity to correct deficiencies. Whereas a company can correct material misstatements detected during a financial statement audit by accepting the auditor’s proposed adjustments, if the auditor detects a material control weakness, itmay not be possible to fix it in time. Because the auditor’s opinion is “as of” the balance sheet date, the auditor must issue an adverse opinion on internal control when material weaknesses exist, even when the company receives an unqualified opinion on the financial statements.Take as a whole. The auditor exercises judgment to ascertain those accounts considered “significant” or more than material. The auditor also considers qualitative characteristics. For example, investment balances not material to the overall financial statements may obscure the true nature of the relationship, especially when the investment is in partially consolidated entities or involves debt guarantees. And certain accounts that are liquid or incorporate significant estimates are riskier than others. Examples include cash, marketable securities, and warranty liabilities.Point in time. Internal control procedures can relate to either transaction flows or account balances, sometimes referred to as “stocks.” Examples of controls relating to transaction flows include approving cash disbursements; prelisting cash receipts; approving credit sales; and matching purchase orders, vendor invoices, and receiving reports when booking accounts payable. Controls over balances (stocks) include periodic reconciliation of bank accounts; reconciliation of subsidiary ledgers with control accounts; procedures for physical inventory counts; and controls governing the periodic preparation of financial statements. Overarching controls include the factors comprising the control environment. Overarching controls and those pertaining to flows operate continuously throughout the fiscal period; controls relating to balances typically operate less frequently. Thus bank accounts are reconciled monthly, whereas controls over cash flows are continuous.Timing considerations. Controls must operate for a long enough period, which need not be an entire fiscal year, to provide sufficient confidence in the auditor’s control tests. Accordingly, the auditor must make several observations of controls that operate only at a point in time. Controls that operate infrequently should be tested closer to the “as of” date. These include controls over: the periodic preparation of financial statements; individual account balances; and no routine transactions. Consider a calendar-year company that begins the procedure of reconciling the accounts-receivable subsidiary ledger to the control account only at the end of December. The auditor might conclude that one observation is not sufficient to evaluate this control’s operating effectiveness.These considerations suggest that an unqualified opinion on internal control should state: “The controls were effective for a sufficient period of time during the fiscal year to be able to support the conclusion that they were still effective at the end of the period.” Nevertheless, Standard 2 calls for expressing an opinion as of a point in time, the end of the fiscal year.PCAOB Standard 2 requires the auditor to obtain evidence of the effectiveness of controls pertaining to all relevant assertions for all significant accounts each year; each year must stand on its own. It also calls for the auditor to vary the nature, extent, and timing of testing from year to year to introduce unpredictability and to respond to changing circumstances. Examples of variations include changing the number of tests performed and adjusting the combination of testing procedures.Audit ReportsStandard 2 specifies the content of the report on internal control. Auditors should be aware of several factors:•An auditor may provide either separate or combined reports on the financial statements and internal control.•Whereas the opinion on the financial statements typically addresses multiple periods, the opinion on internal control covers only the most recent fiscal year.•When an auditor issues separate reports, the annual report must contain both.•The reports should have the same date, normally the last day of fieldwork.•An auditor’s report on management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting includes an opinion on the company’s internal control.When the auditor issues an unqualified opinion on the financial statements but an adverse opinion on internal control, due to one or more material weaknesses, the report should indicate that the conduct of the financial statement audit took those material weaknesses into account. This information helps readers of the financial statements understand why the auditor gave an unqualified opinion on the financial statements. The auditor should include similar language when the adverse opinion on internal control affects the opinion on the financial statements.Most Likely Reasons for Opinion ModificationsAs a practical matter, opinion modifications are likely to arise from three circumstances:•Material misstatements detected by the auditor were not identified by the company. This situation could result in an adverse opinion.•Inadequate documentation. This situation is a control deficiency that may constitute a material weakness if extensive. In this case, the auditor renders an adverse opinion.•Inadequate management assessment creates a scope limitation requiring a disclaimer, a qualified opinion on internal control, or withdrawal from the engagement.Because it requires the auditor to go well beyond the review and evaluation of controls that was the norm for reporting on financial statements, Standard 2 promises to fundamentally alter the control systems in public companies and auditors’ assessment of them, thereby providing additional assurance to u sers.译文内部控制审计资料来源:http:// /cpajournal/2005/505/essentials/p22.htm作者：杰克·保罗2005年5月的萨班斯-奥克斯利法案, PCAOB发布了其第2号审计标准：“与财务报表审计相关的针对财务报告的内部控制的审计”，该标准关注对财务报告的内部控制的审计工作，以及这项工作与财务报表审计的关系问题。

内部审计外文文献翻译内部审计在沙特阿拉伯的发展：协会理论透视内部审计职能的价值1早先的研究已经运用各种各样的方法来制定适当的标准以评估内部审计职能的有效率。

比如说，视遵照标准的程度为影响内部审计表现的其中因素之一。

一份1988年国际会计师协会英国协会的研究报告就致力与研究内部审计作用价值中高级管理层和外部审计员的认知力。

这项研究证明了衡量所提供服务的价值的艰难性就是做评估的主要障碍。

收益性，费用标准以及资源利用率都被确认为服务价值的衡量标准。

在这项研究里，它强调了确保内部审计工作应遵从SPPIA的必要性。

在美国，1988的Albrechta研究过内部审计的地位和作用，还为了能有效的评估内部审计的效率特别制定出一套框架。

他们发现有四个能让内部审计部门发展从而提高内部审计效率的要件：一个合适的企业环境，高级管理层的支持，具备高素质的内部审计人员以及高质量的内部审计工作。

在这项研究里学者们强调管理层和审计人员都应该承认内部审计职能对于企业来说是一种具有增值性的职能。

在英国，1997年，Ridley 和D’Silva证明遵循专业标准的重要性是促进内部审计职能增值功能的最重要的因素。

遵循SPPIAAbdulrahman A. M. Al-Twaijry, John A. Brierley and David R. Gwilliam* Internal Audit Research大量的研究都特别专注于内部审计部门对于SPPIA遵从性的研究。

1992年，Powell et al对11个国家的国际会计师协会的成员进行了一项全球性的调查以证明是否有全球性的内部审计文化。

他们发现对这11个国家的国际会计师协会成员的调查中，有82%的是遵循SPPIA的。

这个蛮高的百分比率促使学者们建议SPPIA提供内部审计这个职业全球化的证据。

许多的研究已经关注涉及到独立性的SPPIA标准。

1981年，Clark et al发现内部审计部门的独立性和内部审计人员所做报告的权威性是影响他们工作客观性的最至关重要的两个因素。

编写内部审计报告（中英文实用版）英文文档内容：Internal Audit ReportIntroduction:This report presents the findings and recommendations of the internal audit conducted on [Name of Department/Area] within the organization [Name of Organization].The audit was conducted to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the department"s operations, risk management practices, and compliance with relevant policies and procedures.Scope:The audit covered a period from [Start Date] to [End Date] and included a review of financial records, operational processes, and internal control systems.The audit was performed in accordance with the generally accepted auditing standards and the organization"s internal audit policy.Findings:1.Financial Management:- The department"s financial records were incomplete and inaccurate.Recommendation: Implement a robust financial management system to ensure accurate and complete records.- Expenditures were not properly authorized, and there was a lack of segregation of duties.Recommendation: Establish clear authorization procedures and segregation of duties to prevent misappropriation of funds.2.Operational Processes:- The department"s operational processes were inefficient, leading to delays and increased costs.Recommendation: Streamline operational processes to improve efficiency and reduce costs.- There was a lack of documentation and record-keeping practices.Recommendation: Develop and implement comprehensive documentation and record-keeping policies.3.Internal Control Systems:- The internal control systems were weak, with gaps in access controls and monitoring procedures.Recommendation: Strengthen internal control systems by implementing effective access controls and monitoring procedures.- There was a lack of employee training and awareness regarding compliance requirements.Recommendation: Provide regular training sessions to employees to enhance their understanding of compliance requirements.Recommendations:Based on the findings of the audit, the following recommendationsare made:1.Implement a robust financial management system to ensure accurate and complete financial records.2.Establish clear authorization procedures and segregation of duties to prevent misappropriation of funds.3.Streamline operational processes to improve efficiency and reduce costs.4.Develop and implement comprehensive documentation and record-keeping policies.5.Strengthen internal control systems by implementing effective access controls and monitoring procedures.6.Provide regular training sessions to employees to enhance their understanding of compliance requirements.Conclusion:The internal audit revealed several areas of improvement within the [Name of Department/Area].Implementation of the recommendations will enhance the department"s effectiveness and efficiency, improve risk management practices, and ensure compliance with relevant policies and procedures.Management is requested to review this report and take necessary actions to address the identified issues.Date: [Date of Report]中文文档内容：内部审计报告引言：本报告总结了组织[组织名称]内部审计小组对[部门名称]进行的内部审计的结果和建议。

环境可持续性内部审计毕业论文中英文资料外文翻译文献论文简介：本文介绍了环境可持续性内部审计相关文献资料的翻译。

这些文献资料内容涵盖了内部审计在环境保护领域中的应用、内部审计对企业可持续性发展的帮助、企业内部审计师应具备的技能和素质等方面，对研究环境可持续性内部审计具有一定的参考价值。

翻译文献：1. Brown, M. (2009). Environmental sustainability and its relevance to internal audit. Internal Auditor, 66(4), p.26-32.该文从环境保护的角度剖析了内部审计在环境可持续性方面的作用。

通过调查显示，企业对环境保护的关注度越来越高，这为内部审计工作提供了机会。

内部审计应该重视环境可持续性方面的问题，为企业持续发展提供有价值的建议。

2. Taylor, G. (2010). Climate change: Implications for internal audit. Internal Auditor, 67(2), p.34-39.该文提到随着全球气候变化，许多公司开始将应对气候变化作为企业活动的一部分。

内部审计在这个过程中可以发挥重要作用。

内部审计师应具备透彻的了解气候变化的知识和技能，在审计过程中，应该对企业的碳足迹、能源效率和降低排放等方面进行审计。

3. Bernard, V.L. (2009). Internal auditing to enhance environmental sustainability. Internal Auditor, 66(5), p.57-60.该文提到内部审计在环境保护方面的作用比较明显。

企业需要在环境保护方面关注可持续性。

内部审计应该加强在环境保护方面的审计工作，提出合理的改进建议。

同时，企业内部审计师还应具备相关技能和素质，以更好地支持可持续发展。