管理 审计 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 内部控制爆X炸
本科毕业论文内部控制外文文献翻译完整版中英对照
A Clear Look at Internal Controls: Theory and ConceptsHammed Arad (Philae)Department of accounting, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, IranBarak Jamshedy-NavidFaculty Member of Islamic Azad University, Kerman-shah, IranAbstract: internal control is an accounting procedure or system designed to promote efficiency or assure the implementation of a policy or safeguard assets or avoid fraud and error. Internal Control is a major part of managing an organization. It comprises the plans, methods, and procedures used to meet missions, goals, and objectives and, in doing so, support performance-based management. Internal Control which is equal with management control helps managers achieve desired results through effective stewardship of resources. Internal controls should reduce the risks associated with undetected errors or irregularities, but designing and establishing effective internal controls is not a simple task and cannot be accomplished through a short set of quick fixes. In this paper the concepts of internal controls and different aspects of internal controls are discussed. Keywords: Internal Control, management controls, Control Environment, Control Activities, Monitoring1. IntroductionThe necessity of control in new variable business environment is not latent for any person and management as a response factor for stockholders and another should implement a great control over his/her organization. Control is the activity of managing or exerting control over something. he emergence and development of systematic thoughts in recent decade required a new attention to business resource and control over this wealth. One of the hot topic a bout controls over business resource is analyzing the cost-benefit of each control.Internal Controls serve as the first line of defense in safeguarding assets and preventing and detecting errors and fraud. We can say Internal control is a whole system of controls financial and otherwise, established by the management for the smooth running of business; it includes internal cheek, internal audit and other forms of controls.COSO describe Internal Control as follow. Internal controls are the methods employed to help ensure the achievement of an objective. In accounting and organizational theory, Internal control is defined as a process effected by an organization's structure, work and authority flows, people and management information systems, designed to help the organization accomplish specific goals or objectives. It is a means by which an organization's resources are directed, monitored, and measured. It plays an important role in preventing and detecting fraud and protecting the organization's resources, both physical (e.g., machinery and property) and intangible (e.g., reputation or intellectual property such as trademarks). At the organizational level, internal control objectives relate to the reliability of financial reporting, timely feedback on the achievement of operational or strategic goals, and compliance with laws and regulations. At the specific transaction level, internal control refers to the actions taken to achieve a specific objective (e.g., how to ensure the organization's payments to third parties are for valid services rendered.) Internal controlprocedures reduce process variation, leading to more predictable outcomes. Internal controls within business entities are called also business controls. They are tools used by manager's everyday.* Writing procedures to encourage compliance, locking your office to discourage theft, and reviewing your monthly statement of account to verify transactions are common internal controls employed to achieve specific objectives.All managers use internal controls to help assure that their units operate according to plan, and the methods they use--policies, procedures, organizational design, and physical barriers-constitute. Internal control is a combination of the following：1. Financial controls, and2. Other controlsAccording to the institute of chartered accountants of India internal control is the plan of organization and all the methods and procedures adopted by the management of an entity to assist in achieving management objective of ensuring as far as possible the orderly and efficient conduct of its business including adherence to management policies, the safe guarding of assets prevention and detection of frauds and error the accuracy and completeness of the accounting records and timely preparation of reliable financial information, the system of internal control extends beyond those matters which relate to the function of accounting system. In other words internal control system of controls lay down by the management for the smooth running of the business for the accomplishment of its objects. These controls can be divided in two parts i.e. financial control and other controls.Financial controls:- Controls for recording accounting transactions properly.- Controls for proper safe guarding company assets like cash stock bank debtor etc- Early detection and prevention of errors and frauds.- Properly and timely preparation of financial records I e balance sheet and profit and loss account.- To maximize profit and minimize cost.Other controls: Other controls include the following:Quality controls.Control over raw materials.Control over finished products.Marketing control, etc6. Parties responsible for and affected by internal controlWhile all of an organization's people are an integral part of internal control, certain parties merit special mention. These include management, the board of directors (including the audit commit tee), internal auditors, and external auditors.The primary responsibility for the development and maintenance of internal control rests with an organization's management. With increased significance placed on the control environment, the focus of internal control has changed from policies and procedures to an overriding philosophy and operating style within the organization. Emphasis on these intangible aspects highlights the importance of top management's involvement in the internal control system. If internal control is not a priority for management, then it will not be one for people within the organization either.As an indication of management's responsibility, top management at a publicly owned organization will include in the organization's annual financial report to the shareholders a statement indicating that management has established a system of internal control that management believes is effective. The statement may also provide specific details about the organization's internal control system.Internal control must be evaluated in order to provide management with some assurance regarding its effectiveness. Internal control evaluation involves everything management does to control the organization in the effort to achieve its objectives. Internal control would be judged as effective if its components are present and function effectively for operations, financial reporting, and compliance. he boards of directors and its audit committee have responsibility for making sure the internal control system within the organization is adequate. This responsibility includes determining the extent to which internal controls are evaluated. Two parties involved in the evaluation of internal control are the organization's internal auditors and their external auditors.Internal auditors' responsibilities typically include ensuring the adequacy of the system of internal control, the reliability of data, and the efficient use of the organization's resources. Internal auditors identify control problems and develop solutions for improving and strengthening internal controls. Internal auditors are concerned with the entire range of an organization's internal controls, including operational, financial, and compliance controls.Internal control will also be evaluated by the external auditors. External auditors assess the effectiveness of internal control within an organization to plan the financial statement audit. In contrast to internal auditors, external auditors focus primarily on controls that affect financial reporting. External auditors have a responsibility to report internal control weaknesses (as well as reportable conditions about internal control) to the audit committee of the board of directors.8. Limitations of an Entity's Internal ControlInternal control, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving an entity's control objectives. The likelihood of achievement is affected by limitations inherent to internal control. These include the realities that human judgment in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns in internal control can occur because of human failures such as simple errors or mistakes. For example, errors may occur in designing,Maintaining, or monitoring automated controls. If an entity’s IT personnel do not completely understand how an order entry system processes sales transactions, they may erroneously design changes to the system to process sales for a new line of products. On the other hand, such changes may be correctly designed but misunderstood by individuals who translate the design into program code. Errors also may occur in the use of information produced by IT. For example, automated controls may be designed to report transactions over a specified dollar limit for management review, but individuals responsible for conducting the review may not understand the purpose of such reports and, accordingly, may fail to review them or investigate unusual items.Additionally, controls, whether manual or automated, can be circumvented by the collusion of two or more people or inappropriate management override of internal control. For example, management may enter into side agreements with customers that alter the terms and conditions of the entity’s standard sales con tract in ways that would preclude revenuerecognition. Also, edit routines in a software program that are designed to identify and report transactions that exceed specified credit limits may be overridden or disabled.Internal control is influenced by the quantitative and qualitative estimates and judgments made by management in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of an entity’s internal control. The cost of an entity's internal control should not exceed the benefits that are expected to be derived. Although the cost-benefit relationship is a primary criterion that should be considered in designing internal control, the precise measurement of costs and benefits usually is not possible.Custom, culture, and the corporate governance system may inhibit fraud, but they are not absolute deterrents. An effective control environment, too, may help reduce the risk of fraud. For example, an effective board of directors, audit committee, and internal audit function may constrain improper conduct by management. Alternatively, the control environment may reduce the effectiveness of other components. For example, when the nature of management incentives increases the risk of material misstatement of financial statements, the effectiveness of control activities may be reduced.9. Balancing Risk and ControlRisk is the probability that an event or action will adversely affect the organization. The primary categories of risk are errors, omissions, delay and fraud In order to achieve goals and objectives, management needs to effectively balance risks and controls. Therefore, control procedures need to be developed so that they decrease risk to a level where management can accept the exposure to that risk. By performing this balancing act "reasonable assurance” can be attained. As it relates to financial and compliance goals, being out of balance can causebe proactive, value-added, and cost-effective and address exposure to risk.11. ConclusionThe concept of internal control and its aspects in any organization is so important, therefore understanding the components and standards of internal controls should be attend by management. Internal Control is a major part of managing an organization. Internal control is an accounting procedure or system designed to promote efficiency or assure the implementation of a policy or safeguard assets or avoid fraud and error. According to custom definition, Internal Control is a process affected by an entity's board of directors, management and other personnel designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories namely. The major factors of internal control are Control environment, Risk assessment, Control activities, Information and communication, Monitoring. This article reviews the main standards and principles of internal control and described the relevant concepts of internal control for all type of company.内部控制透视：理论与概念哈米德阿拉德（Philae）会计系，伊斯兰阿扎德大学，哈马丹，伊朗巴克Joshed -纳维德哈尼学院会员伊斯兰阿扎德大学，克尔曼伊朗国王，伊朗摘要：内部控制是会计程序或控制系统，旨在促进效率或保证一个执行政策或保护资产或避免欺诈和错误。
内部控制l论文相关 外文翻译
审计委员会、董事会和内部控制重大缺陷的整治Audit Committees, Boards of Directors, and Remediation of Material Weaknesses in Internal Control译文：本研究探讨审核委员会和董事会的有效性是否与公司的内部控制的重大缺陷修复的及时性有关。
选取的样本包括从2003年7月至2004年12月编报公司根据的“萨班斯- 奥克斯利法案”第302节披露的至少一种重大弱点。
采用Logistic回归分析发现，较大的审计委员会，审计委员会，更大的非会计财务专业知识，以及更多的独立委员会的企业更容易及时地修复重大缺陷。
这些结果表明，审计委员会及董事会对监督整治重大缺陷发挥了重要作用。
总的来说，这项研究有助于我们了解审计委员会和董事会根据萨班斯- 奥克斯利法案“的制度的有效性。
这项研究还确定了整治重大缺陷及时性的重要决定因素，这是提高财务报告质量和恢复投资者信心的关键。
研究表明，审核委员会的质量与该公司的内部控制的质量呈正相关。
克里希南（2005）使用的样本公司，改变了审计师在1994-2000年期间发现，独立审计委员会和审计委员会的财务专业知识是不太可能与内部控制的问题有相关性。
Zhang等人（2007）使用在“萨班斯- 奥克斯利法”颁布后披露内部控制缺陷的样本公司，发现这些企业更可能有财务专业知识少的审计委员会。
如果审计委员会的质量与内部控制的质量有关，似乎有理由相信，一个更有效的审计委员会将确保及时修复重大缺陷，以保持内部控制的有效性。
一个有效的审计委员会可以直接进行，通过审查财务和会计人员的会计程序和控制来监督公司的控制。
当发现重大弱点，有效的审计委员会，更可能采取实用的方法，并和审计师讨论如何整治重大缺陷。
通过努力跟进有关建议，以改善内部控制和监测整治力度的进展，一个更有效的审计委员会可能导致重大缺陷的及时整治。
虽然审计委员会在监督整治重大缺陷中发挥了重要作用，但在整治过程中，董事会可以提供增量的监督。
内部控制外文翻译资料
Internal management, establish a sound internal control system, enterprises and the needs for enterprises to face market risks and challenges. Only in accordance with the actual situation of their own, developed to meet the needs of internal management control system, and strictly follow the implementation can be sustained, steady and healthy development.内部管理，建立健全内部控制制度，企业和企业面临的市场风险和挑战的需要。
只有按照自己的实际情况，开发出满足内部管理控制系统的需求，并严格遵照执行能够持续，稳定和健康的发展。
The so-called internal control, the means by the enterprises board of directors, managers and other staff implementation, in order to ensure the reliability of financial reporting, operating efficiency and effectiveness of existing laws and regulations to follow, and so provide reasonable assurance that the purpose of the course. Internal controls related to enterprise production and management of the control environment, risk assessment, supervision and decision-making, information and transfer and self-examination, from a business perspective on the whole in all aspects of production. Their effective implementation will undoubtedly promote enterprise production and management to a new level, to promote the rationalization of business processes and standardization.所谓内部控制，董事会的企业董事会，经理和其他员工实施的，为保证财务报告的可靠性，现有的法律法规，经营的效率和效果跟踪，并提供合理的保证，本课程的教学目的。
OPINIONS-ON-INTERNAL-CONTROL关于内部控制的意见大学毕业论文外文文献翻译及原文
毕业设计（论文）外文文献翻译文献、资料中文题目：关于内部控制的意见文献、资料英文题目：OPINIONS ON INTERNAL CONTROL 文献、资料来源：文献、资料发表（出版）日期：院（部）：专业：班级：姓名：学号：指导教师：翻译日期： 2017.02.14LNTU---Acc附录A关于内部控制的意见如果要证明功能扩展到包含内部控制的有效性，那么报告准则则必须制定，若干基本问题必须被解决。
随着日益频繁增长，审计员听取了他们应该发表的一个效力于客户的内部控制制度建议的意见。
这一证明功能扩展的主张者迅速指出，目前已经有了实例如独立审计师的报告公开他们的客户的内部控制制度和一些政府机构的成效，包括一些空置中的美国证券和交易委员会，都需要一个报告。
这些证实类型的反对者公布了任何关于内部控制的有效性，他们认为，目前有显着性差异监管机构的报告要求和提出意见的内部控制将会误导公众。
本文综述了目前报告的做法，考虑到理想状态相关的危害的特点，并最后提出了一些在任何给与最后判决之前必要的予以回答的问题。
现状报告虽然审计员的报告中的一些情况提及了内部控制的性质，但作出的本质陈述还有很大不同的效应。
大型银行。
关于对内部控制的观点事实上出现在一些大型银行和看法发行的年度报告中。
有时这些意见是被董事会要求的。
例如，下面的主张出现在1969年年度报告的一个大型纽约银行中，作为第3款的独立会计师的标准短形式的报告：我们的审核工作包括评价有效性，大块的内部会计控制，其中还包括内部审计。
我们认为，在于程序的影响下，再加上银行内部审计工作人员所进行的审核，这些构成一个有效的系统的内部会计控制。
意见被提供给几个其他银行，但它们基本上引用的意见是一样的。
美国证券交易委员会的规定。
美国证券交易委员会表格X-17A-5，要求独立审计师作出某些有关的内部控制陈述，并必须在每年的大多数成员国家与每一个证券经纪或注册的交易商根据1934年证券交易法第15条进行交流时。
会计内部控制中英文对照外文翻译文献
会计内部控制中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)内部控制透视：理论与概念摘要：内部控制是会计程序或控制系统，旨在促进效率或保证一个执行政策或保护资产或避免欺诈和错误。
内部是一个组织管理的重要组成部分。
它包括计划、方法和程序使用，以满足任务，目标和目的，并在这样做，支持基于业绩的管理。
内部控制是管理阶层的平等与控制可以帮助管理者实现资源的预期的有效管理的结果通过。
内部控制应减少或违规错误的风险关联未被发现的，但设计和建立有效的内部控制不是一个简单的任务，不可能是一个实现通过快速修复短套。
在此讨论了内部文件的概念的不同方面的内部控制和管制。
关键词：内部控制，管理控制，控制环境，控制活动，监督1、介绍环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1，另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。
控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。
思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。
主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。
作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线，维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。
内部控制，我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊，内部审计和其他形式的控制。
COSO的内部控制描述如下。
内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。
在会计和组织理论，内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构，工作和权力流动，人员和具体的管理信息系统，旨在帮助组织实现。
这是一种手段，其中一个组织的资源被定向，监控和测量。
它发挥着无形的（重要的作用，预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源，包括生理（如，机械和财产）和乙二醇，声誉或知识产权，如商标）。
在组织水平，内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告，及时反馈业务上的成就，并遵守法律，法规。
在具体的交易水平，内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标（例如，如何确保本组织的款项，在申请服务提供有效的。
本科毕业论文内部控制外文文献翻译完整版中英对照
A Clear Look at Internal Controls: Theory and ConceptsHammed Arad (Philae)Department of accounting, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, IranBarak Jamshedy-NavidFaculty Member of Islamic Azad University, Kerman-shah, IranAbstract: internal control is an accounting procedure or system designed to promote efficiency or assure the implementation of a policy or safeguard assets or avoid fraud and error. Internal Control is a major part of managing an organization. It comprises the plans, methods, and procedures used to meet missions, goals, and objectives and, in doing so, support performance-based management. Internal Control which is equal with management control helps managers achieve desired results through effective stewardship of resources. Internal controls should reduce the risks associated with undetected errors or irregularities, but designing and establishing effective internal controls is not a simple task and cannot be accomplished through a short set of quick fixes. In this paper the concepts of internal controls and different aspects of internal controls are discussed. Keywords: Internal Control, management controls, Control Environment, Control Activities, Monitoring1. IntroductionThe necessity of control in new variable business environment is not latent for any person and management as a response factor for stockholders and another should implement a great control over his/her organization. Control is the activity of managing or exerting control over something. he emergence and development of systematic thoughts in recent decade required a new attention to business resource and control over this wealth. One of the hot topic a bout controls over business resource is analyzing the cost-benefit of each control.Internal Controls serve as the first line of defense in safeguarding assets and preventing and detecting errors and fraud. We can say Internal control is a whole system of controls financial and otherwise, established by the management for the smooth running of business; it includes internal cheek, internal audit and other forms of controls.COSO describe Internal Control as follow. Internal controls are the methods employed to help ensure the achievement of an objective. In accounting and organizational theory, Internal control is defined as a process effected by an organization's structure, work and authority flows, people and management information systems, designed to help the organization accomplish specific goals or objectives. It is a means by which an organization's resources are directed, monitored, and measured. It plays an important role in preventing and detecting fraud and protecting the organization's resources, both physical (e.g., machinery and property) and intangible (e.g., reputation or intellectual property such as trademarks). At the organizational level, internal control objectives relate to the reliability of financial reporting, timely feedback on the achievement of operational or strategic goals, and compliance with laws and regulations. At the specific transaction level, internal control refers to the actions taken to achieve a specific objective (e.g., how to ensure the organization's payments to third parties are for valid services rendered.) Internal controlprocedures reduce process variation, leading to more predictable outcomes. Internal controls within business entities are called also business controls. They are tools used by manager's everyday.* Writing procedures to encourage compliance, locking your office to discourage theft, and reviewing your monthly statement of account to verify transactions are common internal controls employed to achieve specific objectives.All managers use internal controls to help assure that their units operate according to plan, and the methods they use--policies, procedures, organizational design, and physical barriers-constitute. Internal control is a combination of the following：1. Financial controls, and2. Other controlsAccording to the institute of chartered accountants of India internal control is the plan of organization and all the methods and procedures adopted by the management of an entity to assist in achieving management objective of ensuring as far as possible the orderly and efficient conduct of its business including adherence to management policies, the safe guarding of assets prevention and detection of frauds and error the accuracy and completeness of the accounting records and timely preparation of reliable financial information, the system of internal control extends beyond those matters which relate to the function of accounting system. In other words internal control system of controls lay down by the management for the smooth running of the business for the accomplishment of its objects. These controls can be divided in two parts i.e. financial control and other controls.Financial controls:- Controls for recording accounting transactions properly.- Controls for proper safe guarding company assets like cash stock bank debtor etc- Early detection and prevention of errors and frauds.- Properly and timely preparation of financial records I e balance sheet and profit and loss account.- To maximize profit and minimize cost.Other controls: Other controls include the following:Quality controls.Control over raw materials.Control over finished products.Marketing control, etc6. Parties responsible for and affected by internal controlWhile all of an organization's people are an integral part of internal control, certain parties merit special mention. These include management, the board of directors (including the audit commit tee), internal auditors, and external auditors.The primary responsibility for the development and maintenance of internal control rests with an organization's management. With increased significance placed on the control environment, the focus of internal control has changed from policies and procedures to an overriding philosophy and operating style within the organization. Emphasis on these intangible aspects highlights the importance of top management's involvement in the internal control system. If internal control is not a priority for management, then it will not be one for people within the organization either.As an indication of management's responsibility, top management at a publicly owned organization will include in the organization's annual financial report to the shareholders a statement indicating that management has established a system of internal control that management believes is effective. The statement may also provide specific details about the organization's internal control system.Internal control must be evaluated in order to provide management with some assurance regarding its effectiveness. Internal control evaluation involves everything management does to control the organization in the effort to achieve its objectives. Internal control would be judged as effective if its components are present and function effectively for operations, financial reporting, and compliance. he boards of directors and its audit committee have responsibility for making sure the internal control system within the organization is adequate. This responsibility includes determining the extent to which internal controls are evaluated. Two parties involved in the evaluation of internal control are the organization's internal auditors and their external auditors.Internal auditors' responsibilities typically include ensuring the adequacy of the system of internal control, the reliability of data, and the efficient use of the organization's resources. Internal auditors identify control problems and develop solutions for improving and strengthening internal controls. Internal auditors are concerned with the entire range of an organization's internal controls, including operational, financial, and compliance controls.Internal control will also be evaluated by the external auditors. External auditors assess the effectiveness of internal control within an organization to plan the financial statement audit. In contrast to internal auditors, external auditors focus primarily on controls that affect financial reporting. External auditors have a responsibility to report internal control weaknesses (as well as reportable conditions about internal control) to the audit committee of the board of directors.8. Limitations of an Entity's Internal ControlInternal control, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving an entity's control objectives. The likelihood of achievement is affected by limitations inherent to internal control. These include the realities that human judgment in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns in internal control can occur because of human failures such as simple errors or mistakes. For example, errors may occur in designing,Maintaining, or monitoring automated controls. If an entity’s IT personnel do not completely understand how an order entry system processes sales transactions, they may erroneously design changes to the system to process sales for a new line of products. On the other hand, such changes may be correctly designed but misunderstood by individuals who translate the design into program code. Errors also may occur in the use of information produced by IT. For example, automated controls may be designed to report transactions over a specified dollar limit for management review, but individuals responsible for conducting the review may not understand the purpose of such reports and, accordingly, may fail to review them or investigate unusual items.Additionally, controls, whether manual or automated, can be circumvented by the collusion of two or more people or inappropriate management override of internal control. For example, management may enter into side agreements with customers that alter the terms and conditions of the entity’s standard sales con tract in ways that would preclude revenuerecognition. Also, edit routines in a software program that are designed to identify and report transactions that exceed specified credit limits may be overridden or disabled.Internal control is influenced by the quantitative and qualitative estimates and judgments made by management in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of an entity’s internal control. The cost of an entity's internal control should not exceed the benefits that are expected to be derived. Although the cost-benefit relationship is a primary criterion that should be considered in designing internal control, the precise measurement of costs and benefits usually is not possible.Custom, culture, and the corporate governance system may inhibit fraud, but they are not absolute deterrents. An effective control environment, too, may help reduce the risk of fraud. For example, an effective board of directors, audit committee, and internal audit function may constrain improper conduct by management. Alternatively, the control environment may reduce the effectiveness of other components. For example, when the nature of management incentives increases the risk of material misstatement of financial statements, the effectiveness of control activities may be reduced.9. Balancing Risk and ControlRisk is the probability that an event or action will adversely affect the organization. The primary categories of risk are errors, omissions, delay and fraud In order to achieve goals and objectives, management needs to effectively balance risks and controls. Therefore, control procedures need to be developed so that they decrease risk to a level where management can accept the exposure to that risk. By performing this balancing act "reasonable assurance” can be attained. As it relates to financial and compliance goals, being out of balance can causebe proactive, value-added, and cost-effective and address exposure to risk.11. ConclusionThe concept of internal control and its aspects in any organization is so important, therefore understanding the components and standards of internal controls should be attend by management. Internal Control is a major part of managing an organization. Internal control is an accounting procedure or system designed to promote efficiency or assure the implementation of a policy or safeguard assets or avoid fraud and error. According to custom definition, Internal Control is a process affected by an entity's board of directors, management and other personnel designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories namely. The major factors of internal control are Control environment, Risk assessment, Control activities, Information and communication, Monitoring. This article reviews the main standards and principles of internal control and described the relevant concepts of internal control for all type of company.内部控制透视：理论与概念哈米德阿拉德（Philae）会计系，伊斯兰阿扎德大学，哈马丹，伊朗巴克Joshed -纳维德哈尼学院会员伊斯兰阿扎德大学，克尔曼伊朗国王，伊朗摘要：内部控制是会计程序或控制系统，旨在促进效率或保证一个执行政策或保护资产或避免欺诈和错误。
内部控制审计【外文翻译】
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。
内部会计控制毕业论文外文翻译
附录A:internal control systeminternal control the management of internal checking, with the development of society has put forward the accounting control, management control, internal control structure, internal control integrated framework, internal control risk management framework, concepts.1.internal checkingas recorded in the historical books, as early as in the year before 3600 left and right of the Mesopotamia Cultural period, which, at that time was extremely simple financial management activities, the author requested the money to be paid for by money payment list, and by another record will be the inventory reconciliation and summary reports; and in ancient Egypt, the oversight officer of the institution; and the ancient Roman Empire of the royal treasury, there has been a double account; my Western Zhou period there have been "a bit financial access, the tree, the eyes and ears had been chapter." The period during the Song dynasty in the main library and 3 in the easy. All of these are internal checking of the application. Therefore, internal checking a person is not safe disposal account, and another person cannot be independent of the control system, that is to say it must be two employees of mutual restraint and mutual inspection. internal checking the implementation of the system is to two is of universal significance of the basic assumption that: One is two or more than two persons or departments inadvertently committing the same the possibility of errors is very small, 2 is two or more than two persons or departments of conscious collusion collusion and fraud of possibilities is far lower than a single individual or department for fraud. As part of its internal control, internal checking requirements in management, all the assets and cash and cash equivalents of receipt and payment, clearing and its registration, it should be by two or more people to deal with, in order to check each other, and troubleshooting the disadvantages.2.internal control systemwith the industrial revolution, the AB, the market competition is becoming increasingly intense, the original simple internal checking system gradually by individual economic control to all economic activities. The United States registered accounting belonging to the Association of the audit procedures in the 1958 release of the 29 audit procedures bulletin the independent auditors evaluating internal control of the internal accounting controls, in the internal control in the internalaccounting control", and "internal management control, and the internal accounting control" is defined as: "The security of property and the accuracy of the accounting records, and reliability with direct contact of the methods and procedures. internal accounting control, including the authorization and approval system, the financial assets of the physical control; accounting and preparation of financial statements, their property assets, and other on-the-job separation; as well as the internal audit and control.In 1972, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in the Auditing Standards Bulletin No. 1 in accounting control and management control of the definition of a re-specification. The notice pointed out that the accounting control plans and procedures, in order to safeguard assets and financial data for reliability, and for the following points provide reasonable assurance that: 1. Implementation of the economic business must meet the level of a general authorization or special authorization requirements; 2. Record economic business must, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or other criteria based on financial statements, and the protection of assets; 3. To access assets, must be approved by the senior management; 4. accounting personnel must be in a certain interval period, the assets of the account number for the amount and the physical assets of the number and amount in the inventory stock, once it is found that difference, it is timely to take effective measures to remedy the situation. In 1973, the Auditing Standards Bulletin No. 1 of the amendment, it is necessary to further improve the accounting control of the definition and scope.3 internal control structure80's of the 20th Century, Western auditors gradually believe that internal control should be the focus of the internal control structure. In 1988 the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in the audit guidelines Bulletin No. 55 of the notice stated that: "The Enterprise Internal control structures, including the provision to meet enterprise-specific goals and establish the norms and procedures. Notice of the internal control structure of the 3 elements, namely the control environment, the accounting system and control procedures. control environment, including the establishment of, and the strengthening or weakening of specific policies and procedures that affect various factors; accounting system provides the economic business identification, analysis, classification, and registration, as well as a report of the method, at the same time it made clear the assets and liabilities of the operational and management responsibilities; and control procedures wherebymanagement guidelines and procedures, with a view to achieving a certain goal. internal control structure, there are no longer clear distinction between accounting control and management control, and the content and scope has expanded to include more management control of the content. The salient features of which are the control environment, the elements, and stressed that the management of internal control of the attitudes, awareness and behavior, and control of their environment, lease, and that these factors is to achieve control objectives of the environment that requires auditors to assess the risks involved, in addition to our concern about accounting system and control procedures, it is responsible for the internal and external environment for evaluation. From the accounting control" and "management control" of the case, and that the internal control structure of the building, so that internal control has expanded the scope and content, and, more importantly, from a single policy and procedural changes to the 3 elements of build Chongqing people have learned, + thesis into the "structure" in order to bring about the internal control of the heat sink to the system of change and development. This shift also led the internal control from the technology-oriented enterprise to guide development.4 internal control the overall research frameworkto the 1990s, in order to curb the ever fiercer accounting fraud activities, 1992 COSO Committee published the internal control integrated framework report, as a result of the 1994 revision, and the internal control is defined as: "The internal control is a business by the Board, the management and other staff, the management layer is designed to achieve the following objectives and provide reasonable assurance that the process: Improve business performance and efficiency, and ensure that the financial reporting reliable and relevant laws are followed. Report and the internal control of the "3 elements" to "5 elements, namely control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring. Since then, internal control into the overall framework of the era. COSO consolidation of the internal control framework emphasized the following concepts: the first, internal control is a long-term process that is used to achieve the purpose of the tool, and not an end in itself; its 2, internal control is in the organization at every level of staff, and is not simply a policy, the manual and a table; its 3, the internal control of the board of directors and management to provide reasonable assurance that, rather than an absolute guarantee of its 4, the internal control by adjusting to achieve one or more independent, but there are cross-cuttingobjectives.5 risk-management frameworksince the start of the 21st century, there have been a few major events, in particular, the Enron bankruptcy, WorldCom's scandal and Xerox's take account of events, the heavy blow to the investor confidence in capital markets. Based on this, and in 2004 for the month of September, the Commission COSO published the enterprise risk management framework, the constructor has an internal risk control framework, internal control of 4 goals and 8 major elements. 4 goals, strategic objectives, operational objectives, objective of the report and the legitimacy of target. 8 elements, respectively, to control the environment, goals, risk identification, risk assessment, risk response, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring. The report also pointed out that the risk to the business management is a process, and it is composed of a main body of the board of directors and management, as well as all of the other employees, and to the specified strategic and cross-cutting the enterprise production and management, and is designed to identify and assess the possible impact that the principal objectives of the potential issues and risk management, and to make it to the main goal of providing a risk capacity within reasonable assurance.The COSO for the enterprise risk management" concept of the State, has a strong emphasis on the following concepts: A. enterprise risk management is a process, and it flows to the business; B. enterprise risk management is applied to develop a strategy for the entire process; C. enterprise risk management is in the organization at all levels of all staff in the implementation of the; D. enterprise risk management throughout the business, at all levels and units, including the Enterprise at all levels of the risk portfolio;E. enterprise risk management to identify any in the event of a may affect business operations and production potential, and the risk to control the inclusion of risk capacity; F. enterprise risk management will be able to provide a corporate board and management to provide reasonable assurance that; G Enterprise Risk Management's goal was to achieve one or more different types, but also cross-cutting goals.附录B:内部控制制度发展内部控制源于企业管理的内部牵制，随着社会的发展先后提出了会计控制、管理控制、内部控制结构、内部控制整合框架、内部控制风险管理框架等概念。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
外文出处：Maijoor S. The Internal Control Explosion[J]. International Journal of Auditing, 2000,4(1):101–109.内部控制爆炸①摘要：Power的1997版书以审计社会为主题的探讨使得审计活动在联合王国（英国）和北美得到扩散。
由审计爆炸一同带动的是内部控制制度的兴起。
审计已经从审计结果转向审计制度和内部控制，它已内部控制爆炸然成为公众对公司治理和审计监管政策的辩论主题。
Power表示对什么是有效的内部控制各方说法不一。
本人对内部控制研究方面有一个合理的解释。
内部控制对非常不同概念的各个领域的会计进行探究，并研究如何控制不同水平的组织。
因此，内部控制研究的各类之间的交叉影响是有限的，而且，许多内部会计控制是研究是再更宽广的公司治理问题的背景下进行的。
所以，许多有关内部控制制度对公司治理的价值观点扔需要进行研究。
关键词：机构理论；公司治理；外部审计；内部审计；内部控制制度；管理控制1 概述Power的1997版书以审计社会为主题的探讨使得审计活动在联合王国（英国）和北美得到扩散。
由审计爆炸一同带动的是内部控制制度的兴起。
审计已经从审计结果转向审计制度和内部控制，它已然成为公众对公司治理和审计监管政策的辩论主题。
例如，在最近的对于欧洲联盟内外部审计服务的内部市场形成的辩论中，监管建议建立关于内部控制和内部审计制度。
虽然对有关内部控制的价值期望高，但Power表示对什么是有效的内部控制各方说法不一。
本人对内部控制研究方面有一个合理的解释。
内部控制是对非常不同概念的各个领域的会计进行探究，并研究如何控制不同水平的组织。
因此，内部控制研究的各类之间的交叉影响是有限的，而且，许多内部会计控制是研究是再更宽广的公司治理问题的背景下进行的。
所以，许多有关内部控制制度对公司治理的价值观点扔需要进行研究。
在审计和公司治理的公共政策辩论中，内部控制的概念越来越得到重视。
公共越来①Maastricht Accounting and Auditing Research and Education Center (MARC), Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Universiteit Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands s.maijoor@marc.unimaas.nl Fax: 31-43-3884876 Tel: 31-43-3883783越关注内部控制，令人对power在1997年英国和北美的书中的审计社会的现状有所信服。
此书的主题是在Anglo-Saxon经济体的审计活动：审计爆炸的扩散。
Power表示，联合开发与审计爆炸带动了内部控制制度兴起。
增加监管问责制是公众对审计和公司治理政策辩论机构内部控制系统的一部分。
然而Power注意到，尽管公众对内部控制的关注度迅速增加，内部控制的概念还是很模糊。
他支出，内部控制是什么，内部控制的有效性的界定是内部控制的最基本问题。
本文讨论研究内部控制的兴起，认为内部控制的研究也有一些潜在的问题。
首先，在以往的研究中，长期的内部控制涵盖完全不同的概念。
其次，有关的内部控制研究机构的规模是有限的，要从孤立的学科进行交叉使用得到结果很难。
因此，内部控制是尚未独立的研究范畴。
最后，以往的对内部控制的研究没有彻底解决在审计和公司治理的公共政策辩论中谈到的内部控制有关问题。
假设的内部控制、财务报告和公司治理的基本关系也没有被证实。
本文解构如下：在开始对内部控制进行研究和讨论之前，先介绍了两个主要的，在Power1997的书中所提出的发展：第一部分讨论了审计爆炸，第二部分讨论了内部控制的崛起。
两者也讲被从欧盟的角度评论。
第三部分讨论了什么是内部控制，并从会计研究的三个主要观点出发，研究内部控制制度。
第四部分确定了内部控制和公司治理的公共政策辩论所承担的四个基本关系，并讨论之前的相关研究。
最后一节提供了一个总结和结论。
2 内部控制的崛起不论是否存在审计爆炸，Power1997和1998在审计中变得越来越重要。
根据Power （1997年83爷），因为内部控制系统的可审计假设使得审计爆炸成为可能。
根据更具体的财务审计，审计内部控制系统是财务审计起很很大的作用。
作为内部控制制度兴起的结果，外部审计的重点从审计结果转变为审计的制度。
此外，内部控制制度也成为监管体系的一部分。
许多国家的企业管制报告和改革建仪，包括内部控制和内部控制报告。
内部控制的崛起与共同发展，是增加内部审计的公共意义。
内部控制系统的可审计假设使得审计爆炸成为可能。
担心Power系统是否能够审计不是技术问题，而是由专业验收的可审计性。
Power(1997年54-57页），表示他自己的观点，关于内部控制和吉百利代码，其中包括董事以及核数师有关内部控制制度的责任和建议。
Power认为，内部控制的崛起也与欧洲联盟一级的发展需作说明。
内部控制的概念在欧洲联盟内的财务报表审计对市场内部的建立的讨论是十分重要的。
目前，欧洲联盟几乎没有任何共同的审计规定，也没有财务报表审计的内控市场。
只有两个方面的审计协调：一个是组织的审核（如前面提到的指令）还有一个是审计师的资格审核（第八指令的结果）。
因此，目前的内部控制系统的报告，目前不包括任何欧洲的会计或审计。
1996年，欧盟委员会公布了一份研究报告和绿皮书。
即名为《欧洲联盟的法定审计师的角色、地位和责任》。
这些包括内部控制和审计建议数量的出版物是将内控市场摄入欧盟委员会的重要的第一步。
3 什么是内部控制前面的章节表明内部控制在公共政策辩论和欧盟中引起越来越多的兴趣。
然而，由Power(1997)观察到，关于内部控制的定义和有效性的判断，在公共政策讨论中产生了很多疑问。
对于内部控制的研究，将在下文讨论，以用来强调Power(1997)的观点。
在进行内部控制进行研究和讨论之前，应该明白什么是内部控制。
对于什么是内部控制这个问题，Power(1997年，83页）是引用了一个作为会计专业文献中的概念开始的。
传统上，在会计专业文献中，内部控制是指像职责分工组织，会计控制和关注这个措施，授权策略，组织结构，采取措施以保护资产和信息的信誉测试。
这些会计控制可以是一般性的或特别设计的，和有关的组织作为一个整体。
最近会计专业文学扩大了内部控制的概念，现在使用的定义就更加广泛，除了会计控制以外还涵盖了许多其他的控制内容。
公共政策文件关于审计和公司治理就特别使用了广泛的内部控制定义。
比如，COSO报告（1992）对内部控制的定义为：他是一个能够影响一个董事会、管理人员和其他人员，旨在提供合理的能够保证实现的目标的过程，具体解释为：（1）行动的有效性和效率（2）财务报告的可靠性（3）遵守适当的法律和法规。
4 四个未来研究内部控制的方向最近公共政策辩论队公司治理有很多的讨论，许多都是在研究组织内部控制、审计和组织绩效之间的关系。
这些关系大多数都没有被证实研究。
在上一节研究的机构理论在三个领域研究的区别是公司治理最关注的问题。
然而，机构理论研究的内部控制主要关注的是如董事会的外部董事、审计委员会、董事的薪酬计划等顶层控制。
经常在公开的政策文件中强烈提及的中等和较低级别的内部控制是机构理论难以考虑到的有关公司治理方面的影响。
Power（1997年和1998年）研究了少数人研究的内部控制的宏观影响，包括中等和较低级别的控制。
如前所述，最后两个类别的控制主要是再内部组织的有效性和审计管理决策方面的研究。
考虑到内部控制和公司治理研究的有限性，假定有利于内部控制制度的经济影响可以受到质疑。
关于内部控制制度的的期望是不符合他们的能力（Power1997年）。
以下四个建议，是内部控制、审计和公司治理的重点讨论的结果。
这些问题到目前为止，已经得到来自学术界的许多人的关注，尤其是考虑到Power(1997)确定的内部控制概念在公共政策辩论中日趋热门：（1）内部控制系统的需求。
（2）内部控制制度和其他控制系统（例如外部审计和外部董事会或碱石灰）之间的关系。
（3）对公司业绩的内部控制的影响。
（4）内部控制报告的需求。
5 总结和结论本文首先阐述了对Power(1997)的观察，得出内部控制制度受到越来越多的关注，这是内部控制爆炸的标志。
改进和加强内部控制制度在公司治理的讨论，经常建议作为公司治理的一项重要的解决问题的方案。
然而，在这些讨论中还是对内部控制是什么以及如何正确进行内部控制产生很大的混乱。
长期的内部控制在会计研究的各种不同的子领域是完全不同的概念。
另外，很少有研究从公司治理的角度关注内部控制。
因此，对假定从公司治理的角度来提供关键的内部控制制度的政策的研究还没有。
显然，对于这些关系的研究在未来会越来越有价值。
外文出处：Maijoor S. The Internal Control Explosion[J]. International Journal of Auditing,2000, 4(1):101–109.The Internal Control ExplosionSteven MaijoorMaastricht Accounting and Auditing Research and Education Center (MARC), Universiteit Maastricht, The NetherlandsAbstract:The central theme in Power’s 1997 book on the audit society is the proliferation of audit activity within the United Kingdom (UK) and North America. The most important joint development with the audit explosion is the rise of internal control systems. Auditing has shifted from auditing outcomes to auditing systems, and internal controls have become the subject of public policy debates on the regulation of corporate governance and the regulation of auditing. Power states that there is much confusion in practice about what (effective) internal controls actually are. This paper makes a similar argument with respect to internal control research. Internal controls are studied in various areas of accounting research, covering very different concepts, and studying controls at different organizational levels. As a result, the cross-fertilization between the various types of internal control research is limited. Also, most internal control research in accounting is not conducted within the context of wider corporate governance issues. Hence, many claims about the value of internal control systems for corporate governance still need to be studied.Keywords:agency theory; corporate governance; external auditing; internal audit; internal control systems; management controlSummaryThe central theme in Power’s 1997 book on the audit society is the proliferation of audit activity within the United Kingdom (UK) and North America. The most important joint development with the audit explosion is the rise of internal controlCorrespondence to: Maastricht Accounting and Auditing Research and Education Center (MARC), Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Universiteit Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands s.maijoor@marc.unimaas.nl Fax: 31-43-3884876 Tel: 31-43-3883783systems. As a result of the explosion of internal control systems, auditing has shifted from auditing outcomes to auditing systems, and internal controls have become the subject of public policy debates on the regulation of corporate governance and the regulation of auditing. For example, in the recent debates on the formation of an internal market for external auditing services within the European Union, regulatory recommendations were made regarding internal control systems and internal auditing. While the expectations regarding the value of internal controls are high, Power states that there is much confusion in practice about what (effective) internal controls actually are. This paper makes a similar argument with respect to internal control research. Internal controls are studied in various areas of accounting research, covering very different concepts, and studying controls at different organizational levels. As a result, the cross-fertilization between the various types of internal control research is limited. Also, most internal control research in accounting is not conducted within the context of wider corporate governance issues. Hence, many claims about the value of internal control systems for corporate governance still need to be studied.The internal control explosionThe concept of internal control receives increasing attention in public policy debates on auditing and corporate governance. The increasing public attention for internal control is convincingly illustrated for the UK and North America in Power’s 1997 book on the audit society. The main theme of the book is the proliferation of auditing activities in Anglo-Saxon economies: the audit explosion. According to Power, a joint development with the audit explosion is the rise of internal control systems. The increased (regulatory) demands for accountability has made organizations’internal control systems part of public policy debates on auditing, and corporate governance. However, Power observes that despite this increased public attention for internal control, the concept is still very vague. He states that there are fundamental problems with what internal controls really are and what it means when they are considered to be effective.This paper discusses research that is relevant for the rise of internal control. Itargues that internal control research has also a number of substantial problems. First, in the previous research conducted, the term internal control covers vastly different concepts. Second, the size of the body of relevant internal control research is limited, conducted within isolated sub-disciplines and has hardly profited from cross-fertilization of the results obtained from various perspectives. Hence, internal control is not yet a separate category of research. Finally, the research conducted on internal control is not explicitly addressing issues relevant to the public policy debates on internal control,auditing, and corporate governance. Assumed fundamental relationships between internal control, financial reporting, and corporate governance have not yet been tested explicitly.This paper is structured as follows. Before starting the discussion of internal control research, the paper introduces the two main, and related, developments identified in Power’s (1997) book: the first section discusses the audit explosion and the second section the rise of internal control. Both developments will also be commented on from a European Union perspective. The third section discusses what internal controls are, and the three main perspectives within accounting research studying internal control systems. The fourth section identifies four fundamental relationships assumed in public policy debates on internal control and corporate governance, and discusses prior related research. The last section provides a summary and conclusions.The rise of internal controlIrrespective of whether there is an audit explosion or implosion, both in Power (1997) and (1998) internal control systems are considered to increase in importance in auditing. According to Power (1997, p. 83), the audit explosion has been possible because of the assumption that internal control systems are auditable. More specifically for financial audits, the concept of auditing internal control systems is at the heart of the financial audit explosion. As a result of the rise of internal control systems, external audits are less focussed on auditing outcomes, and more focussed on auditing systems. In addition, internal control systems are now also becoming part of the regulatory systems. Many national corporate governance reports and reforms include recommendations for internal controls, and reporting on internal controls. A joint development with the rise of internal control is the increased public significance of internal auditors.The rise of internal control is possible because internal control systems became auditable. According to Power, whether or not a system is auditable is not determined by technical auditing aspects but by the acceptance of auditability by the profession. Power (1997, pp. 54 - 57) illustrates his argument regarding the rise of internal control with the case of the Cadbury Code (1992), which includes recommendations for the responsibilities of directors and auditors regarding internal control systems. Power’s point regarding the rise of internal control, can also be illustrated with developments at a European Union level.The concept of internal control is important in the discussion on the establishment of the internal market for financial statement auditing within the European Union. Currently, there are hardly any common European Union regulations regarding auditing, and in fact there is no internal market for financial statement auditing. Only two aspects of auditing are harmonized: which organizations need an audit (as a result of the earlier mentioned Directives), and the qualification of auditors (as a result of the Eighth Directive). Hence, internal control systems, and reporting on those systems, are currently not included in any European Directive on accounting or auditing.In 1996, the European Commission published a research report (Buijink et al. 1996) and a Green Paper, both titled The Role, the Position, and the Liability of the Statutory Auditor within the European Union. These publications were the first major steps in the internal market for auditing services project of the European Commission and included a number of recommendations on internal control and auditing.What are internal controls?The previous sections show that in public policy debates there is an increasing interest in internal controls, also from a European Union perspective. However, as observed by Power (1997), there is much confusion in these public policy discussions about what internal controls actually are and what it means when they are effective. The state of current research on internal control, which will be discussed below, reinforces Power’s (1997) point. The discussion of current internal control research will be preceded by the issue of what internal controls are.To answer the question what internal controls are, Power (1997, p. 83) refers as a start to concepts in the professional accountancy literature. Traditionally, in the professional accountancy literature, internal controls refer to accounting controls, andconcern measures in organizations like segregation of duties, authorization policies, organization structure, measures to protect assets and information, and credibility tests. These accounting controls can either be general and relevant to the organization as a whole, or designed for particular cycles. The recent professional accountancy literature has expanded the internal control concept and now uses much wider definitions. The new definitions cover many other controls in addition to accounting controls. Especially the published public policy documents on auditing and corporate governance use wide definitions of internal control. A report like COSO (1992) defines internal control as:‘A process, effected by an entity’s board of directors, management, and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories:- Effectiveness and efficiency of operations- Reliability of financial reporting- Compliance with applicable laws and regulations’Obviously, the organizational measures that can contribute to this process are numerous. As a consequence of this wide definition, a report like COSO considers many organizational measures to be part of internal control systems, including human resource policies and practices, procedures for communication within organizations, and the management style of the board of directors. A problem with these wider definitions is that it is not clear what the boundaries are of internal control systems. For example, it could be argued that all organizational measures contribute to internal control asdefined by COSO.The unclear boundaries of the concept of internal control are also witnessed to someextent in the academic accounting literature. Within this literature, three areas of (internal) control research can be distinguished: (1) internal control from an external auditing perspective, (2) internal control from an organization theory perspective; and (3) internal control from an economics perspective. Each of the three areas will be discussed below.There is a vast academic literature on internal control from an external auditing perspective. Internal controls are the main subject area in auditing research, and pioneering studies are, for example, Ashton (1974) and Mock and Turner (1981). Internal control research from an auditing perspective mainly focuses on traditional accounting controls. These are studied in the context of decision making by auditors.As a result, the focus is on how accounting controls affect the reliability of financial reporting. Further, most of the internal control research in auditing focuses on problems related to lower level controls, i.e. accounting controls for specific cycles and transactions. Broad control concepts are hardly considered in this literature. Even the concept of control environment, which is currently a standard item in audit manuals of the international audit firm networks, receives limited attention in this area of research.3Control research from an organization theory perspective, or management control perspective, uses a much broader concept of control than in auditing research. The control problems studied in this area of research are mainly at the level of departments and divisions. Further, controls are studied mainly in the context of the organizational effectiveness of departments and divisions. The typical organizational measures distinguished in this area of research are action controls, results controls, and personnel and cultural controls (Merchant, 1998). These organizational measures include traditional internal accounting controls: the action controls listed by Merchant (1998, pp. 27 - 30), are the accounting controls that are typically the subject of study in the external auditing literature. Results controls concern management systems based on rewarding individuals, or groups of individuals, for generating good results. Personnel and cultural controls are based on systems where employees control their own behaviors, or are based on employees controlling each others’behaviours. It should be noted that COSO (1992) more or less combines, both in terms of perspectives and in terms of the controls studied, the two literatures identified above. The control research in the accounting literature from an economic perspective is dominated by agency theory. The control measures studied are broad: monitoring mechanisms, bonding mechanisms and reward systems or bonus plans. Most of the agency theory research focuses on the control problems between outside capital suppliers, and (inside and outside) directors. Hence, this literature focuses on top-level control problems. The economic efficiency of various control mechanisms for solving agency problems are studied extensively. Questions addressed include the trade-off between various control mechanisms (e.g., between external auditing and a board of outside directors) and the efficiency of control mechanisms as a function of firms’capital structures.While there are many similarities between organization and economic approaches to control, they are different (see for a comparison of the two approaches Eisenhardt1985). The organization perspective focuses on the relationship (“fit”) between task characteristics and control measures. In addition, the organization control perspectives makes clear that “people”, culture or social control can be an important control mechanism. The economic control perspective, or agency theory, emphasizes the effects of uncertainty, costs of monitoring mechanisms and rewards for control systems.In sum, within the accounting literature, the term internal control refers to various concepts. Three perspectives can be distinguished: external auditing, management control, and agency theory. The three perspectives differ in the type of controls being subject of study. External auditing is mainly concerned with lower level controls related to specific cycles, processes and transactions. Management control focuses on the control problems of departments and divisions, which could be described as middle-level controls. Agency theory is mainly concerned with the control problems of directors and outside suppliers of capital, the top-level controls. In addition to differences in the organizational level of analysis, as discussed the three literatures differ in perspective. As a result of these different levels of analysis, and the different perspectives taken, the cross-fertilization is minimal between the three sub-areas studying (internal) control. Hence, internal controls are not yet a separate and coherent area of research.Four empirical issues for future internal control researchIn the recent public policy debates on corporate governance, many arguments are used that implicitly assume specific relationships between organizations, internal control, auditing and organizational performance. Most of these relationships have not been studied empirically. Of the three areas of research distinguished in the previous section, agency theory is the most concerned with corporate governance issues. However, the internal controls studied in agency theory are mostly concerned with top-level controls like the board of outside directors, audit committees, and remuneration plans for directors. The corporate governance effects of strong middle- and lower-level internal controls, which are frequently recommended in public policy documents, are hardly considered by agency theory. Power (1997 and 1998) is one of the few who studies the macro-effects of internal control, including middle- and lower-level controls. As stated earlier, the last two categories of controls are mainlystudied in the context of internal organizational effectiveness and audit management decisions.Considering the limited research conducted on internal control and corporate governance, the assumed beneficial economic effects of internal control systems can be questioned. The expectations regarding internal control systems are not in line with their operational capabilities (Power 1997). Below, four issues are suggested which are central to the debate on internal control, auditing, and corporate governance. So far, these issues have received surprisingly little attention from academic researchers, especially considering the current rise of the internal control concept in public policy debates as identified by Power (1997).1. The demand for internal control systems.2.The relationship between internal control systems and other control systems (e.g., external auditing, and board of outside directors or supervisory board).3.The effects of internal control on firm performance.4.The demand for reporting on internal control.Summary and conclusionThis paper starts with the observation by Power (1997) that there is increasing attention for internal control systems, which is labeled as the internal control explosion. In corporate governance discussions, improved and stronger internal control systems are frequently suggested as an important solution to corporate governance problems. However, within these debates there is much confusion about what internal controls are and how they can function properly. This paper argues that here are similar problems in accounting research on internal controls. The term internal control refers to vastly different concepts in sub-areas of accounting research. In addition, few studies are concerned with internal control from a corporate governance perspective. Hence, assumed relationships that are critical from a corporate governance perspective, and thus critical for policy recommendations for internal control systems, are not yet studied. Clearly, future research regarding these relationships would be valuable.References[1] Abdel-Khalik, A.R. (1993) Why do private companies demand auditing? A case for organizational loss of control. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 8(1) pp. 31 - 52[2] American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (1997) Report of the Special Committee on Assurance Services, /assurance/index.htm[3] Ashton, R.H. (1974) An experimental study of internal control judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 12(1), pp. 1143-157[4] Buijink, W., Maijoor, S., Meuwissen, R. and Van Witteloostuijn, A. (1996) The Role, Position, and Liability of the Statutory Auditor within the European Union, study commissioned by DG XV of the European Commission, Luxembourg: ECSC-ECEAEC[5] Buijink, W., Maijoor, S. and Meuwissen, R. (1998) Competition in auditing: Evidence from entry, exit, and market share mobility in Germany versus the Netherlands. Contemporary Accounting Research 15(3), pp. 385 - 404[6] Cadbury Report (1992) Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance, a Code of Best Practice, London: Burgess Science Press [7] Chow, C.W. (1982) The demand for external auditing, size, debt and ownership influences. The Accounting Review 57(2), pp. 272 - 291[8] CNPF AFEP (1995) Le Conseil d’Administration des Sociétés Cotées (Rapport Vienot), Paris[9] Committee of the Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (1992) Internal Control, Integrated Framework (COSO Report), New York: AICPA Committee on Corporate Governance (1997), Recommendations on Corporate Governance in the Netherlands (Peters Report)[10] Eilifsen, A., Knechel, W.R. and Wallage, P. (1999) External Assurance Services and Strategic Business Risk: An International Field Study, Working Paper[11] Eisenhardt, K.M. (1985) Control: organizational and economic approaches. Management Science 31(2), pp. 134 - 149[12] European Commission (1996), The Role, Position, and Liability of the Statutory Auditor in the European Union[13] European Commission (1998) Communication from the Commission; The Statutory Audit in the European Union: The Way Forward[14] Gordon, D.M. (1990) Who bosses whom? The intensity of supervision and the discipline of labor. AEA Papers and Proceedings 80(2), pp. 28 - 32[15] Gordon, D.M. (1994) Bosses of different stripes: a cross-national perspective on monitoring and supervision. AEA Paper and Proceedings 84(2), pp. 375 - 379[16] Haskins, M.E. (1987) Client control environments: an examination of auditors’ perceptions. The Accounting Review 62(3), pp. 542 - 563[17] Leftwich, R., Watts R.L. and Zimmerman J.L. (1981) V oluntary corporate disclosure: the case of interim reporting Studies on Standardization of Accounting Practices: An Assessment of Alternative Institutional Arrangements, supplement to vol.19 of Journal of Accounting Research, pp. 50 - 77[18] Maijoor, S.J. (1994) Economic effects of accounting regulation for public accountants: evidence from the Netherlands. Accounting and Business Research 24 (95), pp. 267 - 276[19] Maijoor, S. and Van Witteloostuijn A. (1996) An empirical test of the resource-based theory: strategic regulation in the Dutch audit industry. Strategic Management Journal 17(7), pp. 549-569[20] Marden, R.E., Holstrum, G.L. and Schneider, S.L. (1997) Control environment condition and the interaction between control risk, account type and management’s assertions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 16(1), pp. 51 - 68[21] McMullen, D.A., Raghunandan, K. and Rama, D.V. (1996) Internal control reports and financial reporting problems. Accounting Horizons, 10(4), pp. 67 - 75 [22] Merchant, K. (1998) Modern Management Control Systems, New Jersey: Prenctice Hall[23] Meuwissen, R.H.G. (1999) The Economics of Auditor Careers and Audit Markets, Doctoral Thesis, Universiteit Maastricht[24] Mock, T.J. and Turner, J.L. (1981) Internal Accounting Control Evaluation and Auditor Judgment, Audit Research Monograph #3, AICPA[25] Pincus, K., Rusbarsky, M. and. Wong, J. (1989) V oluntary formation of corporate audit committees among NASDAQ firms. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 8(4), pp. 239 - 265[26] Power, M. (1997) The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification, Oxford University Press[27] Power, M. (1998) The Audit Implosion: Regulating Risk from the Inside, ICAEW & LSE[28] Weets, V. and Jegers, M. (1997) Are the ‘Big Six’ ‘big’in Belgium? The European Accounting Review 6(4), pp. 773 - 789[29] Widener, S.K. and Selto, F.H. (1998) Management Control Systems and Boundaries of the Firm: Why do Firms Outsource Internal Auditing Activities?, Working Paper, University of Colorado at Boulder。