PART 1: EXECUTIVE BRIEF
Introduction
We describe our inaugural capacity building partnership, serving four West African countries. Further, we provide insights into the valuable benchmarking data that derived from this activity.
“VIRTUAL” AWARD CEREMONIES 4, 7 & 8 SEPTEMBER 2020
This dual-certificated capacity building programme was delivered by West African firm, FJP Development & Management Consultants utilising GQR’s knowledge resources and evaluation tools, techniques and technologies.
We delivered “Certificates of Attendance” to 51 individuals from The Gambia, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Ghana and “Certificates of Appreciation” to 5 valued Keynote Speakers from three countries. Further, we awarded “Certificates of Recognition” to 21 organisations from four countries who had invested in the attendance of their staff.
Contemporary case-studies and presentations from across the globe challenged participants to interpret the situation faced by those entities from the perspective of the responsibilities of internal audit.
Participants also engaged with GQR-powered anonymised evaluations of the practices of each sponsoring entity relative to best global practices. Those self-appraisals allowed participants to reflect on their contribution to the survival and prosperity of their organisations.
We examined the potential and practices of the audit of organisational culture. We detected much interest among participants as we introduced related tools and techniques of culture audit.
Participants were challenged to think about the lessons learnt and to develop action plans for their return to their organisations. Their presentations in the final module were inspiring. Selected data highlights from this seminar included:
Global Internal Audit Survey
GQR simultaneously launched a global perception survey of internal audit comprised of six questions Download Responses that were aligned to the six modules of the online seminar. We had 70 respondents from four continents, 80% of whom were from Sub-Saharan Africa. Respondents were asked to assess each question on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 shows very low confidence and 5 indicates very strong confidence. This indicative analysis focusses on differences in perception between internal auditors and non-auditors.
• We noted that with the exception of one measure, non-auditors are consistently less confident than internal auditors about the profession’s profile. Might this be a mirror image of the infamous “expectations gap” well known of external auditors and their stakeholders? We compared the results of the global survey to that derived from the detailed self-appraisals utilised by seminar participants.
Module 1: The Purpose and Positioning of Internal Audit
• We identified three governance risks with Board-level responsibility relating to whistleblowing, Board Charters and enterprise risk management.
Module 2: The Structure and Resources available to Internal Audit
• Noteworthy risks included inadequate resources and budget, management of outsourced or co-sourced internal audit and the influence of prevailing cultural values on the independence and integrity of recruits.
Module 3: The Execution of the Audit Programme
• Audit execution is the engine of Internal Audit service delivery and, naturally, had the most GQR self-appraisal questions and a wider range of observed risk concerns. Of particular note was the need for effective internal and external quality assessments.
Module 4: The Impact of Internal Audit on the Organisation
• Significant concerns included the timeliness of responses to changes in internal and external organisational negative risks and opportunities, cost/benefit analysis of audit recommendations and Internal Audit contributions to the evaluation of governance performance and related risks.
Module 5: Internal Audit Before COVID 19
• Seminar respondents recorded an average 10% drop in confidence relating to the contribution of internal audit to COVID 19 readiness, from the already low levels of the global survey. • Resource adequacy and people management and development risks were also noteworthy in the detailed seminar responses.
Module 6: Internal Audit and the Recovery from COVID 19
• We sought seminar perceptions on the contribution of internal audit to the post-COVID 19 recovery.
• At a 20% drop from the already low global survey result, this is the most concerning insight of the data selections. It links to concerns about responsiveness to change in module 4 and suggests that internal audit can be doing more to support the recovery from COVID 19.
Course Evaluation: What Participants Think
We are gratified by high evaluations of the quality, impact and relevance of the seminar. Relatively lower assessments of the online medium and technology reflected the challenges encountered with the quality of internet connection in participating countries. Adequate coping tactics were deployed for the infrastructure constraints and we were able to deliver the seminar to an appropriate standard.
PART 2: EVENT DESCRIPTION AND STATISTICAL INSIGHTS
“Virtual” Award Ceremonies 4, 7 & 8 September 2020
On Tuesday 8 September 2020, we welcomed over 60 persons to our final certificate award ceremony for our dual-certificated online training programme entitled: “Internal Audit in Africa: Before and After COVID". This capacity building programme was delivered by West African firm, FJP Development & Management Consultants utilising GQR’s knowledge resources and evaluation tools, techniques and technologies. The ceremony was hosted “virtually” and delivered “Certificates of Attendance” to 51 individuals from The Gambia, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Ghana. On Friday 4 September, we had our first award event, to deliver “Certificates of Appreciation” to 5 valued Keynote Speakers from three countries. On Monday 7 September, we awarded “Certificates of Recognition” to 21 organisations from four countries who had invested in the attendance of their staff. The following entity leaders witnessed the Awards:
• Mr. Abdoulie Jammeh, Director-General, Gambia Civil Aviation Authority, The Gambia
• Mr. Kobi Walker, Group Managing Director, National Petroleum Group, which sponsored participants from its subsidiaries in Sierra Leone and Liberia
• Mr. Saaro Darbo, Director Human Capital, Ecobank Gambia – we welcomed participants from Ecobank Gambia, Sierra Leone and Liberia • Ms. Viola Jones, Director Human Capital, Aureol Insurance Company, Sierra Leone
• Mr. John Nicol, Senior Audit Manager, Rokel Commercial Bank, Sierra Leone
• Mr. Moses Ackah-Jayne, Director Human Capital, National Insurance Commission Ghana
The seminar utilised contemporary case-studies and presentations from across the globe and challenged participants to interpret the situation faced by those entities from the perspective of the responsibilities of internal audit.
In addition, we deployed GQR-powered anonymised evaluations of the practices of each sponsoring entity relative to best global practices for internal audit’s contribution to the resilience of organisations. Those self-appraisals, consistent with the International Professional Practices Framework for Internal Audit, allowed participants to reflect on the journey that they still need to make in their contribution to the survival and prosperity of their organisations.
Module 5 examined the potential and practices of the audit of organisational culture. This offers significant improvement in the impact offered by internal audit to management and to the Board. We detected much interest among participants as we introduced related tools and techniques of culture audit. The final module 6 challenged participants to think about the lessons learnt and to develop action plans for their return to their organisations. Their presentations were inspiring. We note below selected data highlights from this seminar.
Global Internal Audit Survey
GQR simultaneously, in August, launched a global perception survey of internal audit comprised of six straightforward questions that were aligned to the six modules of the online seminar. By mid-September, we had 70 respondents from four continents, 80% of whom were from Sub-Saharan Africa. As with participant responses to the detailed seminar surveys, respondents were requested to assess each question on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 shows very low confidence and 5 indicates very strong confidence.
As with the seminar surveys, we were particularly interested in differences in perception between internal auditors and non-auditors. Please note that these global and seminar findings are indicative and are not definitive. They cannot be considered to be conclusive findings on West African or global internal audit. But they provide useful indications that can be validated by the experiences of readers and by other complementary surveys
It is striking that, with the exception of one measure, non-auditors are consistently less confident than internal auditors about the profession’s profile. Might this be a mirror image of the infamous “expectations gap” well known of external auditors and their stakeholders? Both auditors and their clients were markedly less confident about the contribution made by the profession to COVID 19 readiness and to the recovery actions required post-COVID 19. As the pandemic is likely far from over, internal auditors may have time to redeem themselves on that measure. Below, we compare the results of the global survey to that derived from the detailed self-appraisals utilised by seminar participants.
Module 1: The Purpose and Positioning of Internal Audit
Seminar participants responded to 28 questions that drilled into Question 1 of the global survey.
Note that the auditor/non-auditor groups are once again closely clustered in the seminar responses. But, this time, the indicative levels of confidence have dramatically fallen (average 16%) from the fourth quintile for the global survey to the third quintile for the seminar respondents. There were three seminar questions that were prime contributors to the lower level of confidence.
These three indicate amplified governance risks with Board-level responsibility.
Module 2: The Structure and Resources available to Internal Audit
Seminar participants responded to 17 questions that drilled into Question 2 of the global survey.
The levels of confidence for both groups have once again dropped significantly (average 13%) from the global survey. Some questions that contributed to that drop are analysed below.
Question C4 is of particular interest as it is consistent with GQR’s expectations that organisational functions will be influenced by prevailing sectoral and societal cultural expectations and behaviours.
Module 3: The Execution of the Audit Programme
Seminar participants responded to 29 questions that drilled into Question 3 of the global survey.
At 6%, the average drop from the global survey is much less than with Modules 1 and 2. Contributing factors to the drop are noted below.
Audit execution is the engine of Internal Audit service delivery and, naturally, had the most GQR questions at 29, closely followed by module 1, Purpose and Positioning, at 28 questions. Execution is only meaningful if identity and alignment with corporate strategy are in order, hence the close numbers of questions. The lower confidence ranking of A5- internal and external quality assessments (QA) could be linked to the other identified factors. It is likely that effective and timely QA processes could make it easier to remedy the other elements.
Module 4: The Impact of Internal Audit on the Organisation
Seminar participants responded to 18 questions that drilled into Question 4 of the global survey.
Here, the average drop in confidence has risen again to 13% as noted for module 2 (structure and resources). Curiously, the greater drop in confidence was from the internal auditor group, with an 18% drop from the global survey. Our sample for this survey was different. In addition, to seminar participants, we invited senior management from sponsoring entities, given that impact is most usefully viewed from the perspective of recipients of the service. So, the number of non-auditors is higher for this module’s responses.
The data indicates concern with the timeliness of responses to change in organisational risks and opportunity profiles. As noted in modules 5 and 6 below, this can be rather expensive for an entity.
Module 5: Internal Audit Before COVID 19
Seminar participants responded to 18 questions that drilled into Question 5 of the global survey.
The global survey focussed on the contribution of internal audit to the readiness experienced for COVID 19. But the seminar survey was much broader and thus is not directly comparable. More relevant is the response to Module 4 Qu C3 for which we see an average 10% drop in confidence from the already low levels of the global survey.
Below, we reflect on some of the elements of the broader seminar survey that showed particularly lower levels of confidence.
This module’s survey offered participants the opportunity to reflect broadly on the key issues covered in modules 1 to 4. Resources and people management and development are concerns worth pointing out.
Module 6: Internal Audit and the Recovery from COVID 19
There was no questionnaire for this final module as it was entirely focussed on presentations from participating organisations on their post-seminar learning points and action plans. However, we did specifically ask a related question in the module 4 questionnaire.
At a 20% drop from the already low global survey result, this is the most concerning insight of the data selections. It is related to the issues raised about responsiveness to change in module 4 and suggests that internal audit can be doing more to support the recovery from COVID 19.
Course Evaluation: What Participants Think
We note highlights from the detailed post seminar evaluations.
We are gratified by the positive evaluations of the quality, impact and relevance of the seminar. The relatively lower assessments of the online medium and technology reflected the challenges encountered with the quality of internet connection in participating countries. Adequate coping tactics were deployed for the infrastructure constraints and we were able to deliver the seminar to an appropriate standard.
© 2020, All Rights Reserved. GQRDOTCOM Ltd operating as GQR – Independent Governance and Audit Ratings.
