IIA (Institute of Internal Auditors) Defines Internal Auditing

I think all internal auditor courses do that - except mine, of course. Audit to the standard is their base.

You all know my feelings on 'typical' internal auditors auditing to the standard.

Is anyone current on the status of the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA)?

Any members here (assuming it's still in existence - I haven't looked yet - just 'cleaning out the closet...)?

My boss is working on the budget and asked for a wish list. I'm looking at The Institute of Internal Auditors website and thinking of adding some of their seminars and publications to my list. Does anyone have an opinion about the Internal Auditor magazine? or the Institute in general?

Thanks

I looked at obtaining IIA certification once......I got the impression that they are primarily financial oriented folks, even for the internal.

Hershal

Hershal said:

I looked at obtaining IIA certification once......I got the impression that they are primarily financial oriented folks, even for the internal.

Hershal

Click to expand...

I got that impression too, but it seemed that some of their information can be applied generally. Have you read any articles from the IA magazine?

internal auditing or auditor I feel was not given a full distinct on the bounderies of audit (even not protected to emotional and personnal acceptance to the audit results by the top managment), an accountant auditing Plant operation, i think is ok , as long as the element of audits are within the bounderies of what was documented to what are being done, but again auditors find him or herself deadlock after discovering new process are being in done and not documented. with this I can only say auditors are not to give suggestion (althought its disturbing) even recommendation but limit it self to discussion on what were the findings and pass the responsiblities to top management to decide what needs to be done, top management may or maynot asked the auditor's input to improve or correct such audit findings anyway. and the auditors response should not go beyond the limit of what was documented. the process of auditing with the question of "you documented that this is being done, will you show the evidence that's its being done" sounds very redundant and anoying in my opinion, I rather asked the question "what changes or improvment done and difficulties in preparing records." then byitself evidence will pop-up.

cyrus