Questions related to Audit
I am studying the replication of a management process in the big four audit companies (EY, PwC, KPMG, and Deloitte). This process is relatively similar across these companies. So, is it a single case of replicating the process in the big four? or is it a multiple case study?
Note: I am not looking for variances between cases as there aren't any, I am looking into how the process is replicated in these firms and i am considering them as a one unit.
Dear Author, We received one revision and trying to find second reviewer. To this day we send request for 9 experts in this field (Including authors suggestions). They declined or ignored our invitations. We must search until someone agreed to take on this assignment. If you want to suggest someone else, you have to do it according to the following guidelines: Authors can suggest reviewers but they cannot be from the same institution as the authors, and at least one cannot be from the same country. With best regards,
What is the average time duration between revision submision and final decision for the Journal of biomolecular structure and dynamics?
After submission of revision before 18 days ago the final decision has not come yet. What is the chance of acceptance?
Generally speaking, a revision request means that the editor/reviewers see a merit in publishing your article, but some major/minor changes are required. A reject after revision is uncommon but it happens, what were the main reasons from the author’s side as well as the editor/ reviewers side of the story? Hopefully the answers will help others avoid these pitfalls in their responses to the reviewers!
So, I'm using secondary data to evaluate the following hypotheses:
H1: AUDIT score increase, then BIS scores increase and BAS decreases [This is tested for age groups 18- 40 and 40yrs and above] and for [Males and Females]
H2: Is there a relationship between TriPM scores and AUDIT scores?[This is tested for age groups 18- 40 and 40yrs and above] and for [Males and Females]
H3: Correlation between (BIS and BAS scores) and AUDIT scores?[This is tested for age groups 18- 40 and 40yrs and above] and for [Males and Females]
I would appreciate if anyone could advise which methods are appropriate?
I was think regression or MANOVA but unsure as the demographics I need to need to be dichotomised. Any help is appreciated! I only have the descriptives I have done attached here.
All variables are from self-report questionnaires.
I mean by laws and reglementations which are related to the work of external auditor.
I need some articles which describes or explains the impact between the two concepts.
Many U.S universities offer short-term opportunities doctoral degree holders to pursue further research. They may also allow visiting fellows to audit graduate-level courses and to have access to academic facilities for personal research. To explore these opportunities, how should we contact university faculty or academic departments directly for exchange programs or access laboratory facilities in offline mode. I know someone will be travelling to the USA on their own and would like to access the laboratory to get some certifications or knowledge for the 10 days or 15 days time duration. Is it possible to identify which universities and programs can support a researcher so that he can earn a few credit points and also learn during the time period.
If you know kindly suggest as travel expenses may be covered by the researcher during the visit.
Dear professors and researchers, I am looking for a suitable title for my thesis. I searched a lot but couldn't find a new topic. I am researching in the field of internal audit and external audit. Thanks for your cooperation
I had a major revision paper in Q2 journal and it was holding with the editor. Please, how can I resolve this issue?
I tried to send to them several emails without any reply. Please, how can I resolve the issue raise by them?
I wonder if I should wait for acknowledgement from the journal and comment from the reviewer or editor or just resend my revision?
Once revision is completed and acceptance recommendation is given by Academic editor at Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine (Hindawi), the status pending approval took one month and fifteen days. When I wrote to the journals, they told me that the manuscript is currently being reviewed by in-house staff. What does this emply?
Hope you are doing well.
I want to share my experience with PLOS ONE.
Recently we have submitted some papers in PLOS ONE and after two or three rounds of revision they accepted it officially and send an acceptance Email to all authors.
Then after checking 5-6 months, they have rejected our paper "with no reason".
I summary, for our 5-6 accepted papers, they have just wasted our 1 years and do not forget that they have high charges for the publication.
In addition, we have submitted some new papers in the PLOS ONE and the paper is still "Submitted to the Journal" from the last four months.
Remember that they are also charging very high publication fees.
I just convey to all my colleagues and seniors that think twice and thrice, when you will plan to submit a paper in PLOS ONE.
Compare to this, MDPI can publish a paper just within 3 weeks, and PLOS ONE is taking three months just for changing the status of the paper.
Muhammad Hamzah Saleem
I have submitted paper in one of hindawi's journal. I have completed all revision. The academic editor made his recommendation. The status under pending approval took one month. Why so late? Why happen like this.
Hello I have a manuscript revision with one of the reviewers is concerning about the power of study
Its a case control study with case group having 34 and control group having 71 patients
The primary outcome variable is a continuous variable with a mean 41 and standard deviation of 26 , and not -normally distributed, and our cohort is the largest cohort ever will be published
But there is no prior report on this issue, so how can i do a power analysis
Thanks for helping
I've been looking for recent regulations and matters that are linked to auditing to discuss for my research thesis. I could really use any suggestion regarding auditing, audit market, audit trends...
I would like to include a control variable whether a company is audited by the big four or not? However, in which database the information would be available in yes or no format. I checked Eikon but didn't get the data. Would be glad if you kindly guide me in this regard. Thank you.
i. Although the suggested correction was very less raised by the 2 reviewers in their 2nd revision, why does the editor asked for major revision?
ii. Why does the editor has given me clues to solve each of the raised questions? Does it mean the learned editor is going to accepting my paper after updating the manuscript based on given suggestions by the reviewers?
One of the main differences between Financial Audit and Forensic Audit is that the Financial Audit gives the guarantee that the financial statements that have been checked are true and fair and are reasonable whereas, Forensic Audit helps to analyze and investigate a certain set of transaction, if any fraud has been occurred.
The goal of this project is to set the record straight as much focus have been on the Financial Audit as the Fraud Detector.
The questions are: 1. Who then is the Fraud Detector, a Financial Auditor or a Forensic Auditor?
2. Why are Financial Auditors liable if failed in their audit duty to detect fraud within an organization?
I would like to focus my master thesis on digitalization and audit and I am struggling to find a good research gap. My research topic will be digitalization and its effect on audit innovation. Moreover, the whole topic is still rather vague and I am searching for an interesting currently under-researched field.
Any suggestions? Would much appreciate it!
We had submitted a manuscript on 25 Apr 2020 (please see the attachment 1) titled “Assessing the impact of Pakistani females' religious beliefs on sports by using Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire” to the Journal of Religion & Health for possible publication. Within time spend of 2 years we got not less than 7 revisions (please see the attachment 1) on different time and almost different comments every time. After almost 2nd revision we used MDPI service and spent 1600 CHF (please see attachment 5) for language correction. The latest comments sent by the editor were some statistical changings and recommendation of grammatical review (please see attachments 2 and 3). We used their recommended service and spent almost US$345 (please see attachment 4).
We submitted our last revision on Jan-2022 and waiting for the possibly acceptance email for 3 months (because last revision was just about the language and some minor changings in statistical analysis). And today we just got the rejection (please see the attachment 1) email from the Editor-in-Chief Journal of Religion and Health.
Though the outcome of the process is very disappointing because we used a lot of time, energy and money on the demand of journal, I would like to know from you scholars if there is any academic way to response such kind of journals? It’s not about only our paper, but this effort can also save the time and energy (may be money) of other scholars like you.
I really appreciate your understanding and suggestions.
Hubei Normal University, China.
I’ve been asked to revise a chapter in a textbook. The chapter was written by another author. In revision, is it acceptable to retain any of the original author‘s exact work, or does it need to be completely rewritten in original language? I’ve only revised my own chapters before, and no one seems to know how this is properly handled.
Carbon emissions are usually reflected in social responsibility reports. Do they need to be put into value? Do they need an auditor? What kind of theories could be explained this?
African journal of gastroenterology and hepatology is free (no any article publication charges), the submitted material is subjected to revision via a software program for plagiarism, an open access journal, an eminent group of editorial board members, a strong peer review process with at least 3 peer reviewers per article.
- Reviewer1 Review Report(round1) (Reconsider after major revision(control missing in some experiments)
- Reviewer2 Review Report(round1) (Reconsider after major revision(control missing in some experiments)
- Reviewer3 Review Report(round1) (Reconsider after major revision(control missing in some experiments)
- Reviewer4 Review Report(round1) (Reconsider after major revision(control missing in some experiments)
- Reviewer6 Review Report(round1) (Reconsider after major revision(control missing in some experiments)------------------The above is the conclusion of the preliminary review of an article. The same six reviewers are judging the fate of a PhD. I don't know how he is feeling?
I have a paper that recommended minor revision, and the reviewers ask me to provide the control variable for my model. But I don’t have the model's data anymore, so I cant add control variables to my result. What can I respond to this issues reviewers comments? Any idea? Any good logical response?
University institutions create a scenario where teaching is not committed with social transformation, but mainly with an aspiration towards elitism and the students´ contentment (students understood as “clientele”); research, on its turn, no longer seeks to meet the demands of our society (Sparkes, 2013). On the contrary, it follows the priorities set by foreign multinational companies (Berbegal-Mirabent & Ribeiro-Soriano, 2015). The quality and scientific value of the work is therefore defined by those companies that then lead an “impact culture” difficult to escape from.
Hence the challenges and difficulties that the Spanish university runs into whilst meeting the dynamic and interests of the markets (Berbegal-Mirabent & Ribeiro-Soriano, 2015), especially after its adaptation to the European Higher Education Area.
So, the question could be: Quality assessment systems for university teaching staff: a tool for improving the quality of the system, or an instrument for precariousness?
Currently we are preparing for the ISO audit and I'm in need of a combined audit checklist for health and safety and environment. Can anybody share their audit checklist. Thanks.
In major revision for publication of my paper, one of the points is " Identify the factors that make the accuracy reach 100% for both datasets. How to explain these points in the discussion. Kindly guide me.
I sent a paper to Journal of Cleaner Production and finally got minor revision after 6months. there were two reviewers, reviewer#1 said `The authors have made all the modifications indicated. Therefore, I believe that the article can be accepted.` while reviewer#2 `The authors considered the Reviewer comments very good, ending in a good submission which is very helpful for other authors.` Also got several minor comments and resubmitted the paper anticipating the acceptance. after a month i got major revision (I was surprised). The reason is that reviewer#2 refers back to the same old comments that he gave at the major revision stage (He just copied and pasted alll the comments mentioned in the major revision stage) saying `I do not see that you considered my comments, please review them and finalize the document` . As I believe that there is a confusion regarding the decision and comments from reviewer#2, we have contacted the journal and waiting for a reply (it is almost a week as of 12th October 2021). any Ideas on this matter, what should i do next if a reply doesn't show up? It would be extremely helpful if you could share your experience, if avail.
After a new taxonomy revision or new classification has been peer-reviewed and published in a scientific journal, is it necessary for the taxonomic status of the species recognized in the article to be re-evaluated by the IUCN? Is the scope of the IUCN to review and assess taxonomy of species?
There are several university ranking agencies that are gaining popularity among students, parents, universities, private organizations, and even governments.
The criteria used by these agencies are so different that, being in a top 100 in one ranking might put you in the top 300 in the other. Should these rankings be taken seriously? Should they be used as a measure of the students' quality for postgraduate study, or job entry application?
I am a Masters student in Advanced Nursing, currently undertaking a research module.
Currently trying to write my research proposal.
I am planning to introduce debriefing post ‘critical event’.
Staff are asked ‘what went well’ & ‘what could have gone better’, comments are documented on a ‘debriefing form/tool’.
I am unsure how I would classify this data. Is it an audit? Questionnaire? Qualitative data?
How would you suggest is the best way to analyse such data?
I would appreciate any helpful comments or tips. Thanks
How machine learning performs better for internal audit department in the banking industry than usual audit practices. What objectives could be achieved from branch audit, IT audit, Management audit, Thematic audit, and International audit through Machine Learning?
My paper revision is in progress. However, now I know that another author as the corresponding author must be added to the manuscript. But I can,t know how I can add another new author as correspond at this phase of paper preparation. Can anyone help me with this issue?
how to measure the actual practice of audit quality? Is that possible use the data obtained through questionnaire for determinants of audit quality, for actual audit practice?
Is that possible to use the audit quality measurement for tax audit quality?
What to do if after a two years waiting time in the reviewing process and two rounds of revision you discover that the same journal published a paper with the same aim data and contribution as one part of your previously submitted paper.
Knowing that the published paper was submitted six months after yours and that the second round new reviewer of your paper asks you about your contribution since a same work has been published. How to respond? Is there any legal action? Is this ethical?
Esta parece ser una pregunta sencilla que debería tener una respuesta única y categórica. En teoría, los datos moleculares disponibilizados por otros autores en el GenBank son de LIBRE acceso y de acuerdo a esto, pueden ser utilizados por otros investigadores en nuevos estudios. Algo parecido ocurre con el material biológico (partes de individuos o individuos completos) que es colectado y depositado por un investigador y que posteriormente es utilizado por otros investigadores en nuevos estudios. Este podría ser el raciocinio lógico para cualquier editor que recibe un documento que incluye un análisis filogenético realizado con datos del GenBank. Sin embargo, parece ser que no siempre los editores están de acuerdo con el libre uso de datos moleculares depositados en GenBank. Expongo el siguiente caso:
En primera instancia sometimos para revisión uno de mis artículos a una conocida revista de Biodiversidad Marina. Este trabajo fue el fruto de un extenso proceso de colaboración científica entre colegas del área de la carcinología de varios países que se extendió por más de 4 años, y que incluyó extensos viajes de colecta por toda la costa del Atlántico Sur Occidental junto con la revisión de vastos lotes de organismos depositados en museos dentro y fuera de Brasil.
En sí, en el trabajo propusimos la separación de las poblaciones de un camarón de la costa de Brasil de la gran población de esta misma especie del Atlántico Occidental con la propuesta de una nueva especie para la ciencia más otros detalles taxonómicos. Para darle un fortalecimiento a nuestos datos morfológicos, reanalizamos la información molecular depositada en GenBank por otros autores. Luego de algunos días, un conocido investigador experto en 'squat lobsters' que actuó como editor invitado, nos escribió rechazando el artículo con el argumento de que habíamos cometido una falta ética al utilizar los datos moleculares disponibilizados en GenBank por otro grupo de investigación. Al pedir explicaciones al editor, este defendió la postura del revisor anónimo diciendo que era un problema que nosotros debíamos resolver.
En un segundo intento, el editor de otra revista dentro de Brasil señaló que el análisis molecular era similar al de otro autor y que por lo tanto, el trabajo era rechazado editorialmente. Este editor no se identificó y no permitió ninguna respuesta. Tampoco consideró que la parte molecular de nuestro trabajo apenas representaba el 10% de un trabajo que consideró lotes provenientes de un amplió rango geográfico.
Este relato representa un caso en el que los editores de dos diferentes revistas tienen una idea completamente diferente de lo que debería ser el libre uso de datos moleculares disponibles en GenBank. A todas luces, este parece ser un buen ejemplo de como dos diferentes editores hacen una defensa corporativa del trabajo realizado por investigadores con los cuales mantienen un nexo de amistad. Es decir, en este caso, si los autores de los datos moleculares no fueron capaces de encontrar las diferencias morfológicas que respaldasen sus datos moleculares, nadie más que no sea de su círculo cercano puede publicar el hallazgo de esta nueva especie. La camorra italiana tiene buenos ejemplos dentro de nuestra querida ciencia......
I submitted a manuscript which got reviewed. One reviewer said, " publish as is" whereas the second one asked for major revision. I submitted the revision almost 2 months back. Now for the last 12 days its status is "awaiting recommendations". Normally whenever this status shows it usually means that decision arrives in 3-5 days. This unusually long duration is making me nervous. Can anyone shed some light on this
I develop a CPTED elements audit and site assessment checklists questionnaire consisting of about 43 questions to be answered in the (yes=1, no=0) setup. I want to compute the internal reliability test of this questionnaire. Which of the reliability tests is BEST to use in this situation?
I'm looking for an online course about motor learning or motor control. I could not find anything in the main MOOCs sites (Coursera, Udemy). Does anyone know such a course that I can audit?
I'm conducting a market audit regarding ERP solutions. I'm looking for quality research work related to PESTEL analysis. I'm glad if you can recommend me some high-quality research work. Thank you in advance.
Buenos dias Dr. Efraín de la Cruz Lázaro :
Desde 2019, sometimos a evaluación un articulo a la revista que ud es editor.
Como podemos saber el avance de nuestro manusCrito??
En la revista el status es en revisión.
Dra. Alma Delia Romàn Gutièrrez
Hello All, I'm beginning an extensive revision of my popular manual "Getting started with MTEX". The new version will have the same goal: to assist people who are already familiar with texture theory to analyze EBSD data using the free MTEX software for MATLAB.
I'm adding a lot of new images, clarifying explanations and hopefully making the manual easier to use, but I'd like feedback on anything you think is missing. What did you really struggle with when using the software on EBSD data?
When it's done, I'll put the new version online here first!
Hi this is Ayoob, doing certification in Chartered accountancy, and MBA in finance and currently doing internship in audit & assurance firm.
So, this is my 2nd last semester of MBA and in which we I have to do research thesis phase-1, for this I am in need of to choose topic.
whether I should choose topic from International Standard of Audit (ISA) or from International Accounting Standards(IAS)/International Financial Reporting Standards(IFRS).
Please advise me in this regard.
How to measure audit quality through survey (Primary data) ? Most available measures are secondary measures like earning management, and audit fees? Please guide and help
Probablemente a todos nos ha pasado que hemos recibido alguna vez una revisión arbitraria de uno de nuestros artículos. Dado que el proceso de revisión es anónimo, esta condición es muchas veces aprovechada de forma negativa para rechazar, acusar y levantar, cuestionamientos en contra de los autores de un trabajo. Siendo estas acusaciones verdaderas o simples calumnias, el levantamiento de cuestiones éticas y morales por parte de un referí no permite ningún tipo de defensa por parte de los autores de un trabajo. Esto ocurre con bastante frecuencia en nuestro ámbito científico en donde investigadores de 'renombre' se aprovechan de su condición de poder y del anonimato para hacer todo tipo de acusaciones sin presentar ninguna evidencia que sustente sus argumentos para rechazar un artículo. En general, cuando este tipo de situaciones ocurre, un editor se coloca del lado del revisor sin siquiera solicitar para el revisor un antecedente de la supuesta falta ética y moral. La pregunta que aquí cabe es, ¿Cuál es el verdadero papel de un árbitro durante el proceso de revisión de un artículo?....Ofrecer una revisión técnica de un documento o hacer de juez moral y ético de un trabajo realizado por otros investigadores.....¿Es correcto en términos éticos, acusar de forma anónima a otros colegas de cometer faltas éticas sin presentar ninguna evidencia ni permitir la defensa de los colegas en frente de las acusaciones?......... ¿Las revistas deben presentar un protocolo para poder tomar un papel mucho más activo en este tipo de situaciones? Opine con total libertad......El miedo a romper este tipo de secreto a voces no nos va a permitir mejorar como colectividad.....
I am busy revising a previously validated FFQ. Since it was a dish_based one, its dishes' recipes need to be updated. I wonder if there is a quick method for revision of recipe's content. Otherwise, we have to calculate all recipes denovo which is very time consuming.
My master thesis will be related to Blockchain, more specifically to auditing this technology.
I am currently creating an IT audit program for Blockchain. This intends to be a general audit program for this technology, including as many areas as possible in order to have one main document that could be used for different audit purposes (e.g. auditing ITGC, governance audits, etc).
My initial and main contribution to start this project has been the ISACA audit program (https://www.isaca.org/bookstore/audit-control-and-security-essentials/wapbap). The idea would be to have a "2.0 version", including different tabs for other areas, mapping the processes with COBIT2019, adding a few more columns that could help for the testing process and the final result could be an "upgraded" version of the ISACA Blockchain audit program, ready to be used for auditing Blockchain.
What do you think? Any ideas/suggestions? Has anyone done something similar?
Regarding the testing of General IT Controls for Blockchain (p.e. a tool with this technology), anyone with expertise on this? I have read a very interesting article about this topic:
Sheldon, Mark. (2019). A Primer for Information Technology General Control Considerations on a Private and Permissioned Blockchain Audit. Current Issues in Auditing. 13. 10.2308/ciia-52356. Available at https://aaapubs.org/doi/pdf/10.2308/ciia-52356
Thank you in advance.
while establishing the causality link between HR and Organization performance. organization performance can in terms of financial, employee outcome and organizational performance outcome indices statistics but the real problem which i am also facing is to measure HR through HR Audit, PCMM, BSC and effectiveness(which is difficult to measure in not so IT savy organizations).
if you can help, as i am also facing same challenge in health care Industry in India.
I am currently researching the impact of Covid-19 on individual auditor's efficiency and audit timing. Due to the pandemic, there is a considerable shift to work from distance. For, instance the meeting between the partner or senior auditor and client became via different virtual tools. In addition, junior auditors have been forced to conduct the audit process remotely and more digitally. Thus, many things can be expected due to the shift to distance working during the pandemic that can affect the audit. For instance, if the client has a delay in delivering financial data to the auditor that may cause a delay in auditing. There can be also a delay in the delivery of the work from junior level auditors to senior-level auditors and the meeting between them. on the other hand, using more digital tools may save some time in the audit and enhance efficiency. Thus, auditors' efficiency and auditor performance in this period are ambiguous.
Hi...i have two models. In both models independent variable is audit committee meetings which have significant result with accounting based measure (ROE) but in second model is insignificant with market based measure (EPS).
i am writing conclusion chapter of my thesis and finding possible reason of these results.
I am doing a panel data analysis (random effects) on the effects of audit committee characteristics on discretionary accruals.
However, I find that many of my continous variables in dollar amount have the problem of multicollinearity (Highly correlated) such as MV to BV, total liabilities scaled by total assets, ROA and operating cash flow scaled by total assets. The correlations are as high as 0.9. VIF is as high as 300. It is unreasonable but why?
As a result, when I try to use Modified Jones Model to estimate discretionary accruals, the adjusted R-square is as high as 0.95 which does not make sense in my opinion.
Although I have tried to find the information from some forums and it says that multicollinearity among control variables is not a big problem, because of multicollinearity, my model has a problem of endogeneity.
The problem of endogeneity goes away if I remove all the control variables with muticollinearity.
However I do not want to transform the control variables because it is uncommon to have log 10 of MV/BV, log 10 of ROA or log 10 of operating cash/total assets.
Therefore, what should I do in this situation?
If I ignore the multicollinearity, there is a problem of endogeneity..... Again what should I use with it?
Thank you very much for your help.
Most of the research I've come across speaks to the compromised independence of auditors as a result of offering and delivering non-audit services to their clients, in addition to their performance of the annual financial audit. I am, however, looking for other factors that may call auditor professional skepticism into questions, such as:
1) lack of a defined method to document professional skepticism, but in particular,
2) lack of validation protocols to test the veracity of the information they receive anecdotally from executives and senior management in the interview/discussion process of the annual audit.
Thanks in advance!
We have large amount of Plagiochila collected in Madagascar, therefore would be pleased for their revision/identification.
The administrative traditions in most Latin American countries are more prone to bureaucratic practices concerned in the documentary record of
normative procedures ("compliance") rather than the concrete outputs (or outcomes) of public hospitals as a result of appropriate public health policies.
This situation is mainly understood as one of the consequences of the Iberian colonization heritage, that set up the transmission of customs
of extensive bodies of elaborated written uniform laws and rules for governments in this world region (*).
In my opinion, these administrative practices are somewhat reluctant to introduce M&E (monitoring and evaluation) technics based on academic research work and quantitative-qualitative data collection.
At least for the argentine case, this situation can be verified from the observation of the quotidian work of the External Audit Institutions
-or SAI's- at a federal government level, as well as at subnational levels of government (Courts of Accounts, General Audits, etc.).
In contrast, countries whose public sectors are subject to "performance auditing" or "program evaluations" by their respectives SAI's -such as the Anglo-American administrative traditions or most OECD countries- have not only implemented "compliance audit" methods that verify legal compliance or financial statements, but also applies evaluation methods -supported by INTOSAI guidelines- that audit outcomes of public health policies (**).
(*) Painter, M. and Peters, G. "Tradition and Public Administration", Painter and Peters (Eds.) 2010. Palgrave MacMillan UK.
(**) Barzelay, M. "Central Auditing Institutions and Performance Auditing: A Comparative Analysis of Organizational Strategies in the OECD". Gov.: An Int. Journ. of Pol. and Adm., V.10, No.3, July 1997 (pp.235-260).
I am working on my Ph.D dissertation. I have run a factor analysis of 56 items with maximum likelihood and direct oblimin method. It turns out that only one factor can be extracted (scree plot and Egenvalue>1) from a pool of 56 items, and one item has excessively large loadings (about 70%) on the single factor.
Examining respondents' responses to the items, I found many cases of identical answers to consectutive questions (at least 5). Does this suggest for the revision of the survey?
Thank you very much.
I want to research the impact of internal audit function on the work of external auditor, I will extend the research by showing the extent of the impact of internal auditors relating to some factors such as independence, integrity, and transparency on external auditors work.
I will collect the data by using survey and the sample from external auditor firms.
I am new at this, so I am trying to figure out which test I need to use to analyze my data and the reason behind choosing that test, also did am I correct in choosing only external auditors as sample?
thanks in advance
1- information gathering and request of live docs that can be reconciled, sampled and checked. ratios calculated. - route and repetitive
2- develop test - what does the control show
3 - required docs - what does this tell us
4- working and managing, delegating workload and motivation
correct or incorrect going down different avenues
KYC, professional interaction, justify verify and validate - feedback from novice to expert
4- tailoring tests for reduction of audit risk
If a government leader is chosen (through legal, transparent and audited democratic means) to follow an specific ideological line that fosters certain social programs, and after getting into power the leader of said government decides to change policy due to internal and external pressures that would stir the spending away from social programs (in order to cut spending and avoid risky national debt): is it treason to the democratic will of the people?, or, is it just displaying good economic intentions?
What you should do if you found that one of the reviewers goes through your paper just to reject it and most of his comments are irrational and not constructive. Finally, he rejected the paper without completing the review (and mentioned this in the comment), while the decision of other reviewer was a minor revision. The final decision of the journal was a major revision.