Internal Audit Quality in Saudi Arabia: A Categorical Regression Analysis
|Author(s)||by Abdul Rahman A. Altwaijry, Ahmed Y. Abdel Kheir|
|Keywords||Audit quality, categorical variable, internal audit, IAU staff|
|Open Access||Access PDF Open in New Tab|
The turn of the millennium witnessed financially earth shaking events such as the sudden bankruptcy of Enron in 2001 and the collapse of Arthur Anderson in 2002 followed by the global financial crisis which reached its climax in 2008. These events raised concerns about the credibility of auditing as a means of judging the financial positions of business companies. Consequently the interest of academicians, practitioners and policy makers rose considerably in issues related to audit quality. Researchers, particularly in developed countries and also in LDCs set out to investigate the nature and determinants of audit quality. While research on external audit quality received the bulk of attention, internal audit quality apparently remains under- researched. The present study thus represents an endeavour to fill this gap by investigating internal audit quality for the case of Saudi listed companies on the basis of the perceptions of external auditors affiliated with Saudi audit companies. Using categorical regression analysis, findings indicate that a model that measures internal audit quality as” capacity of the IAU to ensure meeting companys strategic goal and objectives "yields statistically significant results both for the model itself and for the predictor variables coefficients. The predictor variables of the regression included "the extent to which staff members skills cover pertinent disciplines", "percentage of IAU budget to company budget", "getting audited agreement to audit findings", "how many internal auditors available per 1000 employees", "extent to which IAF covers various audit aspects". The foregoing suggests that "capacity of IAU to ensure meeting companys strategic goal and objectives" is a viable measure for internal audit quality. Consequently, the above predictor variables are important determinants of internal audit quality. Two of these predictor variables pertain to the competence and adequacy of the IAU staff members and a third important factor pertains to the audit procedures followed within the organization. Organizations, academicians and practitioners might find these results useful. Further research may travel up the same road; i.e investigate further IAU staff characteristics, audit procedures and processes within the organization and their influence on internal audit quality.
ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGE
Online Publication & Two Hard Copies
|International Journal of Empirical Finance||$ 100||$ 170|
|International Journal of Financial Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|International Journal of Management Sciences||$ 100||$ 170|
|Journal of Empirical Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Education and Literature||$ 60||$ 130|
|Quarterly Journal of Business Studies||$ 50||$ 120|
|Journal of Language and Communication||$ 30||$ 100|
|Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Social Economics||$ 30||$ 100|
|International Journal of Financial Markets||$ 30||$ 100|
|Journal of Public Policy & Governance||$ 30||$ 100|
For a peer-reviewed journal, the publication of articles plays an essential role in the development of a coherent network of knowledge. It is, therefore, essential that all publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers, in the process of publishing the journals, conduct themselves in accordance with the highest level of professional ethics and standards. The publisher is dedicated to supporting the vast efforts of the editors, the academic contributions of authors, and the respected volunteer work undertaken by reviewers. The publisher is also responsible for ensuring that the publication system works smoothly, and that ethical guidelines are applied to assist the editor, author, and reviewer in performing their ethical duties.
The editor has the following responsibilities:
1.The editor should acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within two working days of receipt and ensure an efficient, fair, and timely review process.
2.The editor should ensure that submitted manuscripts are processed in a confidential manner, and that no content of the manuscripts will be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
3.The editor should recuse himself or herself from processing manuscripts if he or she has any conflict of interest with any of the authors or institutions related to the manuscripts.
4.The editor should not disclose the names and other details of the reviewers to a third party without the permission of the reviewers.
5.The editor has the right to make the final decision on whether to accept or reject a manuscript with reference to the significance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal.
6.The editor should by no means make any effort to oblige the authors to cite his or her journal either as an implied or explicit condition of accepting their manuscripts for publication.
7.The editor should not use for his or her own research any part of any data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished articles.
8.The editor should respond promptly and take reasonable measures when an ethical complaint occurs concerning a submitted manuscript or a published paper, and the editor should immediately contact and consult with the author. In this case, a written formal retraction or correction may also be required.