Article2015

Implementing combined assurance: insights from multiple case studies

59 citations0/0 files storedManagerial Auditing Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance Accounting and Organizational Management Corporate Governance and Financial Management

Abstract

Purpose – This purpose of this paper is to investigate how to implement a combined assurance program. Design/methodology/approach – This paper uses qualitative data obtained through semi-structured interviews with six multinationals at different stages of combined assurance implementation maturity. Findings – The paper finds that organizations are still learning through combined assurance implementation because no organization seems to have attained a mature combined assurance program. Nevertheless, our descriptive findings reveal that a successful combined assurance implementation follows six important components. Research limitations/implications – One limitation of this study is that, as the organizations studied are at different stages of combined assurance program implementation, data may have comparability issues. Another limitation is that different interviewees were studied from one case to another. Practical implications – The results have implications both for organizations that do not yet have a combined assurance program in place and for those currently at the implementation stage. It has also implications for chief audit executives who are good candidates to lead a combined assurance implementation and for regulators, as the study describes combined assurance as an important accountability mechanism that helps boards and audit committees exercise their oversight role properly. Originality/value – The study is the first to address combined assurance implementation. It complements the study of the Institute of Internal Auditors UK and Ireland (2010), which identifies the reasons for failed attempts to coordinate assurance activities, by illustrating combined assurance implementation through six international case studies of organizations at different combined assurance implementation stages.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 59 citations exist upstream.

References

1980Qualitative research and evaluation methods 2005How Many Interviews Are Enough?2008Qualitative Data Analysis 2004Case Study Research 2003Risk management: The reinvention of internal control and the changing role of internal audit 2006Relation between external audit fees, audit committee characteristics and internal audit 2012Managing Risks: A New Framework 2011The Adoption and Design of Enterprise Risk Management Practices: An Empirical Study

Cited by

2020An exploratory study on the components and quality of combined assurance in an integrated or a sustainability reporting setting 2020Research on extended external reporting assurance: Trends, themes, and opportunities 2022Corporate governance and the use of external assurance for integrated reports 2020Drivers of combined assurance in a sustainable development context: Evidence from integrated reports 2021Impacts of combined assurance on integrated, sustainability and financial reporting qualities: Evidence from listed companies in South Africa

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.